Arxiv:1804.09082V3 [Astro-Ph.SR] 31 May 2019 Upr O H Oeaceinmcaimo Lntformation

arXiv:1804.09082v3 [astro-ph.SR] 31 May 2019 upr o h oeaceinmcaimo lntformation. planet of mechanism accretion core the for support httepoaiiyo omto fagatpae sapoiaeyao a disk approximately protoplanetary is the planet in metals giant of a amount of total formation of probability the that in lntocrec nrae ihbt tla asadmetallic and mass stellar both with o increases sample updated occurrence an planet with giant together stars, a evolved previous of in sample overestimated our been for not have Stars”) A “Retired (the oainlvlcte rvd diinlcnrainta h mass the that confirmation additional Sim provide literature. velocities the rotational in claims to contrary distributions, velocity space o h rttm.We ednn orcin r osdrdi th in considered are -0.12 corrections a reddening and When s time. this first of the and velocities for subgiants space the 245 calculate of also We sample co parameters. an these physical on address analysis to spectroscopic order a In ve perform occurrence. the planet regarding and concerns mass recent stellar to th challenging led more has far which is counterparts, giants and subgiants for masses accurate lnt eed o nyo tla ealct [eH) u lotema the also but ([Fe/H]), metallicity stellar on only not depends planets yee sn L 2019 using 4, Typeset June version Draft 3 EIE TR EIIE:A PAE IN LNTOCCURREN PLANET GIANT UPDATED AN REVISITED: STARS A RETIRED 2 1 [email protected] avr-mtsna etrfrAtohsc,6 adnSt Garden 60 Astrophysics, for Center Harvard-Smithsonian eateto srnm n srpyis nvriyo Ch of University Astrophysics, and Astronomy of Department bevtoi ainl u eea o´ rsio 7 20 77, José Cristino, General Rua Observatório Nacional, xpae uvy feovdsashv rvddicesn evide increasing provided have stars evolved of surveys Exoplanet M A T ⊙ unGhezzi, Luan E X ffe sapidt h eut,temse ftesbinsaecon are subgiants the of masses the results, the to applied is offset manuscript UCINO TLA EALCT N MASS AND METALLICITY STELLAR OF FUNCTION A 1 tl nAASTeX61 in style ejmnT Montet, T. Benjamin ABSTRACT 2-0,Sa rs´va,Rod aer,R,Brazil; RJ, São Janeiro, Cristóvão,921-400, de Rio M et abig,M 23 USA 02138 MA Cambridge, reet, 2, ⋆ cg,54 .ElsAe hcg,I 03,USA 60637, IL Chicago, Ave, Ellis S. 5640 icago, 10 ∗ n onAhrJohnson Asher John and [ e/H F ] hscreainpoie additional provides correlation This . so ugat with subgiants of es aiyo h orlto between correlation the of racity crsw s IE pcr to spectra HIRES use we ncerns GMdaf,w ofimthat confirm we dwarfs, FGKM f ml nahmgnosmanner homogeneous a in ample aye.Uigteenwresults new these Using nalyses. ni sfrtermain-sequence their for is it an c httefraino giant of formation the that nce lry u esrmn ftheir of measurement our ilarly, acltoso tla masses stellar of calculations e t pt . M 2.0 to up ity s( ss eienwamshrcand atmospheric new derive M et-n ucino the of function ne-to-one ⋆ .Hwvr measuring However, ). itn ihtheir with sistent 3 ERT AS RATE CE M ⊙ eshow We . ⋆ ≥ 1 . M 6 ⊙ 2 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

Keywords: stars: fundamental parameters — stars: atmospheres — stars: evolution — planets: formation

1. INTRODUCTION

The ever increasing sample of exoplanets has facilitated many robust studies of how planet formation and evolution are aﬀected by the physical properties of their host stars. One such result is the correlation between stellar metallicity and the occurrence rate of giant planets around FGK dwarf and subgiant stars (e.g., Gonzalez 1997; Fischer & Valenti 2005; Ghezzi et al. 2010a; Wang & Fischer 2015). Similar analyses for the stellar masses, however, are much more scarce and controversial.

The main limitation appears on the massive end (&1.2 M⊙) of the planet search samples, since the detection or confirmation of exoplanets around main-sequence A and early F stars using radial velocities (RVs) is more difficult due to their higher effective temperatures and larger rotational velocities. In order to overcome this issue, radial velocity surveys have focused on intermediate-mass stars. As stars evolve off of the main sequence towards the red giant branch (RGB), their effective temperatures decrease and their rotation velocities slow down, resulting in spectra from which precise Doppler shifts can be measured. To date, more than 100 exoplanets have been detected around more than 1000 evolved stars (Jofréet al. 2015; Niedzielski et al. 2015). In one of these efforts, Johnson et al.

(2010a) analyzed a sample of 246 subgiants from the SPOCS IV catalog, as well as 948 FGKM dwarfs and subgiants from the Keck M Dwarf Survey (Butler et al. 2006) and the original SPOCS catalog (Valenti & Fischer 2005). Using the complete sample of 1194 stars, with masses ranging from 0.2 M⊙to 2.0 M⊙, Johnson et al. (2010a) determined that the occurrence rate of giant planets increases approximately linearly with stellar mass, from ∼3% for M dwarfs, to ∼8% for FGK dwarfs,

∗ Sagan Fellow Retired A Stars Revisited 3

to ∼14% for stars more massive than 1.5 M⊙, the so-called ”Retired A stars.” This correlation appears to be supported, at least for the FGKM dwarfs, by results from transit surveys (Fressin et al. 2013; Gaidos et al. 2013). Johnson et al. (2010a) also confirmed that the planet-metallicity correlation holds for both M dwarfs and the Retired A Stars. This suggests that planet formation is significantly affected by the stellar mass and chemical composition—two stellar properties that provide crucial links to the physical properties of stars’ protoplanetary disks. These findings were questioned by Lloyd (2011), who pointed out that some discrepancies between the rotational velocities distributions of evolved planet hosts and field stars could be traced back to erroneous mass determinations. Moreover, Lloyd found that the numbers of massive subgiants (M⋆&

1.5 M⊙) observed by Johnson et al. (2010a) seems inconsistent with the predictions from Galactic stellar population models. More massive stars are formed less frequently according to the initial mass function (IMF) and also have a relatively rapid evolution across the Hertzprung Gap. Based on these arguments, Lloyd concludes that many of the Retired A Stars should in fact lie in the mass range 1.0–1.2 M⊙. The errors on the original masses could stem from systematic uncertainties on spectroscopically determined atmospheric parameters or ambiguities in the predictions from stellar evolution models. Johnson et al. (2013) addressed the second concern by generating Galactic stellar population models with TRILEGAL (Girardi et al. 2005). Using a magnitude-limited sample (instead of the volume- limited sample used by Lloyd 2011), they produced a simulated distribution that allows for a larger number of massive stars than Lloyd found—an eﬀect similar to the Malmquist bias—and is thus consistent with the masses determined by Johnson et al. (2010a). Lloyd (2013), on the other hand, argues that the mass distribution is not sensitive to the Malmquist bias, but instead to the usage of diﬀerent Galactic models or input parameters within a given model. Using the Besan¸con model

(Robin et al. 2003), Lloyd (2013) obtains a mass distribution with less massive subgiants that can not be reconciled with the observed data from Johnson et al. (2010a). The fraction of massive subgiants within the Retired A Star sample was also questioned by Schlaufman & Winn (2013). Based on an analysis that is independent of stellar evolution mod- 4 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson els, they showed that the space velocity dispersion of the subgiants with planets were larger than those of a sample of main-sequence A5–F0 stars, but consistent with the that obtained for F5–G5 dwarfs. They thus conclude that the subgiants with planets are most likely the evolved counterparts of less massive main-sequence solar-type stars, instead of “Retired A Stars”. Their analysis also revealed that no more than 40% of the planet-hosting subgiants could have been A5–F0 stars more massive than ∼1.3 M⊙ while on the main sequence. In another study, Sousa et al. (2015b) pointed out that, while the masses they determined for planet-host stars were in general good agreement with values from the literature, there were some notable exceptions. In particular, diﬀerences of up to 100% were found for a few evolved stars. Note, however, that some of these inconsistencies are explained by erroneous mass determinations in the original papers, as explained by (Takeda & Tajitsu 2015, see Section 4.2).

More recent studies of the stellar mass dependence of planet occurrence have been performed by Reﬀert et al. (2015) and Jones et al. (2016). In the former study, the analysis of 373 G and K giants reveals that giant planet occurrence increases with stellar mass in the range 1.0 – 1.9 M⊙, consistent with the ﬁndings of Johnson et al. (2010a). Moreover, there seems to be a maximum for

+0.1 the occurrence rate as a function of stellar mass at 1.9−0.5 M⊙ and a rapid decrease for more massive stars. The latter study uses a sample of 166 giant stars and finds a consistent result: occurrence rate increases with stellar mass, with the maximum at 2.1 M⊙. In the previous works mentioned, masses for the evolved stars were estimated by comparing observed properties (effective temperature, metallicity, and luminosity or surface gravity) with grids of stellar evolution models (e.g., Bressan et al. 2012). Although the accuracy of this method has been thoroughly tested for main-sequence stars (e.g., Torres et al. 2010), results for sugbiants and giants are still debated, as is clear from the above discussion. In an additional effort to test if stellar evolution models are also reliable for evolved stars, Ghezzi & Johnson (2015) showed that PARSEC evolutionary tracks (Bressan et al. 2012) coupled with the code PARAM (da Silva et al. 2006) can recover model-independent masses from eclipsing binaries and asteroseismology within ∼4% for the interval ∼0.7 – 4.5 M⊙. Therefore, the method itself does not present any issues that would signif- Retired A Stars Revisited 5 icantly overestimate the masses of subgiants and giants. Nevertheless, incorrect input parameters could still lead to erroneous mass determinations. To avoid model-dependent issues, most recent efforts to solve the Retired A Stars controversy focused on the determination of empirical masses. Johnson et al. (2014) performed multiple mass measurements for the bright giant HD 185351 using spectroscopic, interferometric and asteroseismic data. Although discrepancies on the 2.6σ level were observed, all determined values confirm that

HD 185351 is more massive than 1.5 M⊙. Campante et al. (2017) determined an asteroseismic mass for the planet-hosting subgiant HD 212771 that is consistent with recent spectroscopic estimates and also with its classification as a Retired A Star. Stassun et al. (2017) determined virtually model independent masses (from empirical radii and density or spectroscopic surface gravity) for 358 planet- hosting stars, achieving a precision better than 15% for 134 of them. Within this most accurate sample, 30 stars lie in the HR diagram region typically occupied by the Retired A Stars and ∼80% of them have masses consistent with this classification. North et al. (2017) and Stello et al. (2017) investigated the masses of evolved stars using asteroseismology. The former study show that five of the seven analyzed objects (1.0 – 1.7 M⊙) have spectroscopic masses slightly larger than the corresponding asteroseismic value. However, the authors claim the offset is not significant and highly dependent on the adopted literature mass. In a similar comparison, the latter study reveals a 15-20% offset for six (out of seven) stars with masses larger than 1.6 M⊙. Both studies highlight a large scatter among literature masses and trace the differences back to the input parameters and their uncertainties used in the determination. In this work, we revisit the Retired A Stars sample with the goal of checking if their original masses were in fact overestimated, thereby an artificial correlation between this physical parameter and the occurrence rate of giant planets. We also take the opportunity to investigate the concerns related to the kinematics of these stars. The paper is organized as follows. The sample is presented in Section 2 and new spectroscopic and kinematical analyzes are described in Section 3. Our results are validated in Section 4, including comparisons with the previous ones from Johnson et al. (2010a), other literature sources and other methods. In Section 5, we discuss the consistency between masses 6 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson and space and rotational velocities and obtain an updated relation for the occurrence rate of giant planets as a function of stellar metallicity and mass. Finally, our concluding remarks are presented in Section 6.

2. SAMPLE AND DATA

Our sample of subgiants consists of 245 stars that have been continuously monitored by the Lick and Keck subgiant planet surveys since 2004 and 2007, respectively (see Table 1). The details regarding the sample selection are described in Johnson et al. (2006, 2010b). In summary, targets were selected from the Hipparcos catalog (ESA 1997; van Leeuwen 2007)) according to the following criteria: 0.5

< MV < 3.5 and 0.55 < B − V < 1.10 and V . 8.5. Stars lying less than 1 mag above the main sequence defined by Wright (2005) or in the clump (B − V > 0.8 and MV < 2.0) region are excluded. High-resolution spectra for stars in both the Lick and Keck surveys were obtained with the HIRES (High Resolution Echelle Spectrometer; Vogt et al. 1994) spectrograph on the Keck I 10-m telescope (Mauna Kea, Hawaii). Deckers B1, B2, B3, B5, C2 and E2 were used with a binning of 3x1. This instrumental setup produces resolutions R ≃ 50,000 – 100,0001 and an almost complete spectral coverage from ∼3600 A˚ to ∼7990 A,˚ except for an inter-detector gap from ∼6420 A˚ to ∼6543 A˚ and some inter-order spacings redward of 6600 A.˚ We use the “template” spectra taken without the iodine cell. They were reduced with the Keck pipeline following standard procedures. We measured the signal-to-noise (S/N) values using 112 apparent continuum regions between 5220 A˚ and 6860 A,˚ carefully selected using the spectra of the Sun (reflected off Vesta) and HD 185351 as references. Our targets have S/N & 100 and the typical value is ∼220 (see Table 1).

3. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

3.1. The Line List

We compiled the initial line list for Fe I and Fe II from multiple sources: Sousa et al. (2008), Ghezzi et al. (2010a), Schuler et al. (2011), Tsantaki et al. (2013), Sousa et al. (2014), Liu et al.

1 https://www2.keck.hawaii.edu/inst/hires/slitres.html Retired A Stars Revisited 7

(2014) and Bedell et al. (2014). Only spectral features with λ > 5000 A˚ are selected because of line crowding for lower wavelengths. Lines in the intervals 6270 A˚ ≤ λ ≤ 6330 A˚ and λ> 6865 A˚ are removed in order to avoid possible contamination by telluric lines. Using the HIRES solar spectrum as a reference, we selected only those Fe I lines that were relatively isolated and unblended. We were more ﬂexible for the Fe II case due to the more limited number of lines available for this species. The HIRES solar spectrum was also used as a reference to exclude lines located in the inter-detector or inter-order gaps.

We retrieved all atomic parameters (wavelength λ, excitation potential χ, log gf and van der Waals damping factor) from the Vienna Atomic Line Database (VALD; Ryabchikova et al. 2015 and references therein) on January 2016. We measured equivalent widths (EWs) for all lines on the Solar Flux Atlas (Kurucz et al. 1984) with the updated version of ARES (Sousa et al. 2015a). We adopted the following parameters: smoothder = 4, space = 3.0, rejt = 0.999, lineresol = 0.1 and miniline = 5. A few lines presented clearly wrong EWs and these were replaced by manual measurements done using the task splot in IRAF2. Using the above list, a Kurucz ATLAS9 ODFNEW model atmosphere (Castelli & Kurucz 2004)

3 for the Sun (effective temperature Teff = 5777 K, surface gravity log g= 4.44, metallicity [Fe/H] = 0.00 and microturbulence ξ = 1.00 km s−1) and the driver abfind of the July 2014 version of the Local Thermodynamic Equilibrium (LTE) line analysis code MOOG4 (Sneden 1973), we derived individual Fe abundances for all lines. Option 1 was used for the treatment of the damping in MOOG, i.e. tabulated van der Waals damping factors (Barklem et al. 2000; Barklem & Aspelund-Johansson 2005) are used when available within the code and values from VALD (see Table 2) are adopted otherwise. We removed the Fe I lines that returned absolute abundances A(Fe)5 lower than 7.20 or higher than 7.80. A similar cut was not applied to Fe II due to the more restricted number of lines for this species. We also excluded lines with reduced equivalent widths log(RW) ≡ log(EW/λ)

2 Image Reduction and Analysis Facility (IRAF) is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatory (NOAO), which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc. (AURA) under coop- erative agreement with the National Science Foundation (NSF). 3 [Fe/H]= log(NF e/NH )⋆ - log(NF e/NH )⊙ 4 http://www.as.utexas.edu/ chris/moog.html 5 A(Fe) = log(NF e/NH )+12 8 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson lower than -6.0 and larger than -4.8 in order to avoid too weak or saturated lines, respectively. Finally, we derived solar log gf values by imposing that all remaining lines returned A(Fe) = 7.50 (Asplund et al. 2009) after running MOOG with the same model atmosphere as above. They were used in the analysis of our sample (see Section 3.2) in order to improve the precision of the results, since laboratory and theoretical log gf values for many iron lines still suffer from large uncertainties (e.g., Mashonkina et al. 2011). The final line list contains 158 Fe I and 18 Fe II lines (see Table 2). Using the the updated version of ARES (Sousa et al. 2015a), we automatically measured equivalent widths for the lines in this final list for all 245 target stars. The parameters were the same as those used for the Solar Atlas, except for rejt, which was chosen according to the S/N value of each individual spectrum.

3.2. Atmospheric Parameters

We determined a homogeneous set of atmospheric parameters (Teﬀ , log g, [Fe/H] and ξ) for our target stars using the standard spectroscopic method, which is based on the excitation and ionization equilibria of Fe I and Fe II. As for the Solar Atlas, the analysis was performed in LTE using the July

2014 version of MOOG with option 1 for the damping parameter. We used the ATLAS9 ODFNEW grid from Castelli & Kurucz (2004) to obtain interpolated model atmospheres. We obtained the final parameters for each star through an automated iterative process that has to simultaneously meet four criteria: zero slopes in the linear fits between A(Fe I) and χ (excitation equilibrium) and between A(Fe I) and log(RW); same average values of A(Fe I) and A(Fe II) (ionization equilibrium); and same value for the metallicity in the input model atmosphere and the output result from MOOG. The convergence in each criterion is achieved by successive changes in Teff , ξ, log g and [Fe/H], respectively. Note that [Fe/H] = hA(Fe I)⋆i - A(Fe)⊙, where we adopted A(Fe)⊙ = 7.50 (Asplund et al. 2009). The iterative process also included two rounds of 2σ clipping in order to remove lines that returned abundances too discrepant from the average values. We calculated uncertainties in the atmospheric parameters in the following way. The microturbulence was changed until the linear fit between A(Fe I) and log(RW) had a slope equal to the error of the zero slope from the converged solution. The difference between the this new ξ and the best Retired A Stars Revisited 9 value is adopted as the uncertainty in this parameter. A similar procedure was done for the effective temperature, but the linear fit between A(Fe I) and χ was used instead. Moreover, the contribution from the error in ξ is taken into account by varying this parameter by its uncertainty determined in the previous step and checking what is the slope produced in the linear fit between A(Fe I) and

χ. Then, Teff is varied until we recover a zero slope and the difference between this temperature and best one is taken as the contribution from the error in ξ. The uncertainty in the surface gravity is obtained by varying this parameter until the difference between A(Fe I) and A(Fe II) is equal to the standard deviation of the mean for the latter abundance, taken from the converged solution. The contribution of Teff to the error on log g was also considered (in a procedure similar to the one used above to estimate contribution of ξ to the uncertainty on Teff ). Finally, the uncertainty in [Fe/H] takes into account the standard deviation of mean for A(Fe I) and the variations caused by the errors in Teff , ξ and log g, all added in quadrature. As a first test for our method, we analyzed the HIRES spectrum of sunlight reflected off Vesta (S/N = 267) as if it was a regular target star. The only difference is that only one round of 2σ clipping was performed. Otherwise, many good lines would be excluded due to the low value of σ (as expected, since the log gf values were adjusted using the Sun as a reference). The determined atmospheric parameters are: Teff = 5778 ± 20 K, log g = 4.45 ± 0.07, [Fe/H] = 0.01 ± 0.01 and ξ = 1.009 ± 0.030 km s−1. They are all in excellent agreement with the canonical solar values. The final atmospheric parameters for our target stars are shown in Figure 1. The individual values as well as the associated uncertainties can be seen in Table 3. We should note that the relatively low errors presented on this table are the internal uncertainties of the spectroscopic analysis. More realistic external uncertainties for the standard spectroscopic method employed here (used in the discussion of Section 4.5.1) should be higher, with typical values of up to ∼100 K for Teff , ∼0.2 dex for log g, ∼0.2 dex for [Fe/H] and ∼0.2 km s−1 for ξ (e.g., Ghezzi et al. 2010a; Hinkel et al. 2016). For completeness, we show in Table 4 the sensitivities of the atmospheric parameters to these larger uncertainties for HD 185351 (first spectrum), taken as a representative star in our sample. 10 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

4 44 4 4 4 4

eff

Figure 1. Atmospheric parameters (Teﬀ , log g and [Fe/H]) for our sample of 245 subgiants.

The three results for HD 185351 come from the independent analysis of three different spectra obtained during one observing night and reveal an excellent consistency between the derived parameters. For Figure 1 and the subsequent analyzes in this study, we adopted the arithmetic means as the final atmospheric parameters for HD 185351: Teff = 5039 ± 16 K, log g = 3.27 ± 0.06, [Fe/H] = 0.09 ± 0.01 and ξ = 1.110 ± 0.020 km s−1. The uncertainties were calculated through simple error propagation. It is worth noting that the final log g value is in excellent agreement with the asteroseismic value (3.280 ± 0.011) presented by Johnson et al. (2014). Two stars in Figure 1 clearly differ from the rest of the sample. The first is HD 150331, which apparently has a log g (2.60 ± 0.09) that is too low or a Teff (5726 ± 35 K) that is too high relative to the region occupied by our sample. The Geneva-Copenhagen (GC) Catalog (Casagrande et al.

2011) reports an eﬀective temperature similar to ours (5867 ± 93 K), but a discrepant surface gravity Retired A Stars Revisited 11

(3.35). SIMBAD Astronomical Database shows it as a G0/2 bright giant, a classification that is more consistent with our parameters. The GC metallicity (0.42) is also very different from ours (-0.18). If we use a model atmosphere with the GC parameters and a microturbulence velocity ξ = 1.000 km s−1 as an input to the driver ewfind in MOOG, we do not obtain EWs consistent with those measured with ARES. The second star is HD 21581 and it is significantly more metal-poor ([Fe/H] = -1.61) than all other stars in the sample. Nevertheless, this apparent discrepancy is not an issue since its metallicity, as well as Teff and log g are consistent with other literature measurements (see the 2016 version of the PASTEL catalogue; Soubiran et al. 2016). Thus, we believe our parameters for these two stars are reliable and use them in the following analyzes.

3.3. Rotational Velocities

We determined the stellar projected rotational velocities v sin i for all our stars through spectral synthesis with MOOG. The driver synth was used with option 1 for the damping. The Fe I line at

6703.565 A˚ was chosen for the analysis because it is relatively isolated and unblended. The atomic parameters adopted for the line are the same as in Table 2. Model atmospheres for each star are also necessary as input and we used those obtained in Section 3.2 for the ﬁnal atmospheric parameters. The synthesis in MOOG was performed using the option r for the broadening of the spectral line.

This means that separate values for the instrumental proﬁle FHWMinst, the macroturbulence velocity

Vmacro and the rotational velocity v sin i have to be provided. The values for FWHMinst were chosen according to the setup used for observing each star: 0.096 A˚ for deckers B1, B2 and B3; 0.112 A˚ for deckers B5 and C2; 0.065 A˚ for decker E2. These values correspond to resolutions of ∼70,000,

∼60,000 and ∼100,000, respectively and can be seen in Table 5. We calculated the values of Vmacro

(see Table 5) using the relations presented by Brewer et al. (2016), using our values for Teﬀ and log g (the same as in the model atmospheres described above) in the equations. We should note that, although [Fe/H] does not appear on the relations, HD 21581 has a signiﬁcantly lower metallicity than the stars used to build the calibrations. 12 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

Small adjustments to the continuum level (typically 0.5%) and shifts to the central wavelength of the Fe line (typically 0.02 A)˚ were allowed in order to account for uncertainties in the normalization process and to properly match the observed feature, respectively. We also let the A(Fe) abundance vary within 0.06 dex (with steps of 0.02 dex) the [Fe/H] value determined for the star to account for intrinsic line-to-line scatter in the abundances. After these values were set, we computed a grid of synthetic spectra for v sin i values varying between 0.0 and 15.0 km s−1 with steps of 0.2 km s−1. The best match between the observed and synthetic spectra were found through the minimization of the reduced χ2:

1 n (O − S )2 χ2 = i i (1) r (d − 1) X σ2 i=1

In the above equation, Oi and Si correspond, respectively, to the observed and synthetic normalized fluxes at point i of the spectral line profile. The rms of the continuum is given by σ = (S/N)−1 (see Table 1 for S/N values) and d=n-p represents the number of degrees of freedom in the fit, where n is the number of points in the observed spectra and p=1 is the number of free parameters in the analysis (only v sin i). We calculated the uncertainties on v sin i by varying this parameter until

2 2 2 ∆χr = χr − χr,min = 1. The values of the rotational velocities and its associated errors are shown in Table 5. As an example, we show the best fit for the second spectrum of HD 185351 in Figure 2. For this star, we can see a very good consistency between the three sets of results. As for the atmospheric parameters, we decided to adopt the arithmetic mean and the propagated error as the final value v sin i = 1.7 ± 0.4 km s−1. As an initial test for our method, we once again analyzed the HIRES spectrum of sunlight reflected off Vesta (S/N = 267) as if it was a regular target star. Using FHWMinst = 0.096 A˚ (decker B2)

−1 −1 and the calculated Vmacro = 3.57 km s , we obtained 1.4 ± 0.8 km s , which is in very good agreement with the typical solar value (≈1.6 km s−1; e.g., Valenti & Fischer 2005; Pavlenko et al. 2012; Brewer et al. 2016). In a more general test, we computed synthetic spectra for the Fe I 6703.565 A˚ line using a model atmosphere calculated for the typical atmospheric parameters in our sample

−1 (Teﬀ = 5050 K, log g = 3.30, [Fe/H] = 0.00 and ξ = 1.000 km s ), the corresponding Vmacro (3.45 Retired A Stars Revisited 13

0 00

000 - F - 00

00 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 λÅ

Figure 2. Upper panel: Observed (red circles) and best fit synthetic spectrum (black dashed line) for the second spectrum of HD 185351. Only the Fe I line at 6703.565 A˚ was considered in the fit. Lower panel: Differences between the observed and synthetic spectrum (red circles). The black solid line represents a null difference.

−1 km s ), FHWMinst = 0.112 A˚ (the lower resolution) and v sin ivalues ranging from 0.0 to 10.0 km s−1, with steps of 0.5 km s−1. Then, we used the method described above to analyze these spectra as if they belonged to real stars and were able to recover all rotational velocities within 0.5 km s−1.

3.4. Evolutionary Parameters

We determined the evolutionary parameters of our target stars (mass, radius, log g and age) through the comparison of observational parameters with grids of evolutionary tracks. We performed this analysis using the version 1.3 of the PARAM code, kindly provided by Leo Girardi6. The code

6 For the web interface maintained by Leo Girardi at the Osservatorio Astronomico di Padova, visit http://stev.oapd.inaf.it/cgi-bin/param. 14 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson adopts a Bayesian statistical framework in order to determine masses, radii, surface gravities and ages from given sets of priors and input parameters (da Silva et al. 2006). We used version 1.1 of the PARSEC evolutionary tracks (Bressan et al. 2012) as well as the default options for the Bayesian priors: lognormal Initial Mass Function (IMF) from Chabrier (2001), constant Stellar Formation Rate (SFR), and the age interval from 0.1 to 12.0 Gyr. We also chose to provide the input parameters

Teﬀ , [Fe/H], V magnitude and parallax π because asteroseismic information is not available for most of our targets.

The eﬀective temperatures and metallicities were homogeneously and spectroscopically determined on this study (see Section 3.2). The adopted parallaxes and associated uncertainties (see Table 1) are the revised values from van Leeuwen (2007). The only exception was the star HD 33298, which had the negative parallax replaced by the original value from the The Hipparcos and Tycho Catalogues

(ESA 1997). We calculated the V magnitudes from the formula V = VT − [0.090 × (BT − VT )], with values of BT and VT taken from the Tycho-2 catalog (Høg et al. 2000). Uncertainties were determined through simple error propagation.

We corrected all V magnitudes for extinction using AV values calculated with an adapted version of the code extinct.for (Hakkila et al. 1997), which uses the tables from Arenou et al. (1992) (see Table 1). These tables remain among the most relaible sources for estimating reddening for nearby stars within 280 pc (e.g., Gontcharov & Mosenkov 2017). Uncertainties on the corrected magnitudes

V0 were obtained through simple error propagation, where AV uncertainties were estimated using the relative errors σAV /AV given in the tables from Arenou et al. (1992). The distributions for the evolutionary parameters are shown in Figure 3. The individual values for each star are presented on Table 6 along with their uncertainties. The histograms conﬁrm that our stars are mostly more massive, evolved and younger than the Sun, as expected from the target selection. It should also be noted that the mass distribution is consistent with the simulation presented in Figure 3 of Johnson et al. (2013).

3.5. Kinematics Retired A Stars Revisited 15

50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

Number of Stars of Number 10 Stars of Number 10

0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

M (M ⊙) R (R ⊙)

50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

Number of Stars of Number 10 Stars of Number 10

0 0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 log g Age (Gyr)

Figure 3. Distributions for the evolutionary parameters for our sample of 245 subgiants. Masses, radii, surface gravities and ages are shown in the upper left, upper right, lower left and lower right panels, respectively.

We calculated galactic UVW space velocities for our target stars using an adapted version of the code gal uvw.py7. Equatorial coordinates (right ascencion α and declination δ), parallaxes and proper motions were taken from van Leeuwen (2007) (see Table 1). The California Planet Survey uses the iodine cell technique of Butler et al. (1996) to compute highly precise RVs relative to each star’s own spectrum, and therefore produces relative RV measurements. We use absolute RVs, where available, for our kinematics study from the following references, in order of preference: Chubak et al. (2012), Anderson & Francis (2012), Gontcharov (2006), Massarotti et al. (2008) and Brewer et al.

(2016) (see Table 1). The star HD 10245 did not have a RV available in any of these references and

7 Originally written by W. Landsman and made available by Sergey Koposov on astrolibpy at GitHub. 16 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

1 1 1 − −

− ⊙ − − −

− − −

− − − − − − − − − − − −

−1 −1 −1

Figure 4. Galactic UVW space velocities for 244 of the subgiants (HD 10425 did not have an available radial velocity). Masses are represented by the color scale. therefore its space velocities were not calculated. The resulting UVW velocities can be seen on Table 7 and their distributions are presented in Figure 4. Note that U, V and W are positive towards the Galactic center, in the direction of Galactic rotation and in the direction towards the North Galactic pole, respectively. We have not applied corrections for the solar motion in order to compare our results to those presented by Schlaufman & Winn (2013).

4. VALIDATION OF THE RESULTS

As discussed in Section 1, possibly overestimated masses in Johnson et al. (2010a) could have been produced by systematic uncertainties on the input atmospheric parameters. Although the results derived in our study are homogeneous and precise, their accuracy has yet to be tested. We do this by comparing our spectroscopic parameters with those derived by independent methods or studies.

4.1. Validation of the Spectroscopic Temperatures

As a first check, we calculated photometric effective temperatures for our sample using the Teff versus

V − KS calibrations from Gonz´alez Hern´andez & Bonifacio (2009). We calculated the V magnitudes from BT and VT taken from the Tycho-2 catalog (Høg et al. 2000), as explained in Section 3.4. We adopted KS magnitudes from the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS) All-Sky Catalog of Point

Sources (Cutri et al. 2003) (see Table 8). We removed 15 stars with flags D, E or F for the KS magnitude. Moreover, we could not find a reasonable match for the star HD 136418 (i.e., with a KS value that would provide a reasonable Teff ) within the 2MASS catalog. Retired A Stars Revisited 17

We corrected the V − KS colors for the reddening in the following way. First, we converted AV values derived in Section 3.4 to E(B − V ) using the formula AV = 3.1 × E(B − V ). Then, we calculated E(V −KS) values from E(B −V ) using the relation E(V −KS)=2.70×E(B −V ), where the coefficient was taken from Ram´ırez & Meléndez (2005). The final dereddened color (V − KS)0 was obtained with the formula (V − KS)0 =(V − KS) − E(V − KS). The calculated sets of photometric effective temperatures and its errors are presented in Table 8. It should be noted that González Hernández & Bonifacio (2009) derive different polynomials for dwarfs/subgiants and giants, with the limit placed at log g = 3.00 (González Hernández, private communication). We followed this separation when choosing which calibration would be applied to each star, using the spectroscopic log g values as the reference. We calculated the uncertainties in the photometric effective temperatures by adding two contributions in quadrature: the errors propagated from (V − KS)0 and [Fe/H] and the standard deviation of the final calibration (32 K for the dwarfs/subgiants and 23 K for the giants). The photometric temperatures are compared with the spectroscopic values in Figure 5. We can observe a general good agreement over the whole Teff interval. Most stars present offsets lower than ±200 K, and the average difference (in the sense spectroscopic - photometric) is -27 ± 111 K. If we do not consider the six stars with differences larger than ±300 K, the mean difference is -16 ± 87 K. These values validate our spectroscopic temperature scale and are consistent with the typical external uncertainty (∼100 K) mentioned in Section 3.2. Moreover, both the differences and the scatters are similar to those obtained by González Hernández & Bonifacio (2009) when their results are compared with spectroscopic temperatures (see their Section 8.4).

4.2. Validation of the Spectroscopic Gravities

The second test consisted in the comparison of the spectroscopic surface gravities with the trigonometric values returned by PARAM in Section 3.4 (see Table 6). We can see in Figure 6 that the global agreement is good and most stars have oﬀsets smaller than ±0.4 dex, considered as a 2σ limit, where σ is taken as, e.g., the value of the external uncertainty for log g quoted in Section

3.2 or the systematic oﬀset between spectroscopic and trigonometric surface gravities discussed by 18 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

55 eff 5

eff

∆ 5 55 5

eff

Figure 5. Comparison between spectroscopic and photometric effective temperatures for 229 out of 245 target stars (see text for the reasons why some stars were removed). The upper panel shows the direct Spec comparison between the two sets of temperatures. The lower panel presents the difference ∆Teff = Teff - P hot Teff as a function of the photometric Teff . In both panels, solid lines represent a perfect agreement, while dotted and dashed lines correspond to ±100 K and ±200 K, respectively. da Silva et al. (2006). The mean difference (in the sense spectroscopic - trigonometric) is -0.008 ± 0.163 dex. If the ten stars with differences larger than ±0.4 are not taken into account, the average difference becomes 0.012 ± 0.131 dex. We should note that the outliers in this case are note the same as the ones found in the comparison of the temperatures. As for Teff , the above differences are consistent with the typical external uncertainty (∼0.2 dex) mentioned in Section 3.2.

We also checked if there was any correlation between the differences in Teff and log g because systematically incorrect effective temperatures could cause systematic offsets in the surface gravities in the spectroscopic method. We can see there is no such correlation in Figure 7. A linear fit to Retired A Stars Revisited 19

2 ∆ 2 2

Figure 6. Comparison between spectroscopic and trigonometric surface gravities for our 245 target stars. The upper panel shows the direct comparison between the two sets of gravities. The lower panel presents the diﬀerence ∆log g= log gSpec - log gTrig as a function of the trigonometric log g. In both panels, solid lines represent a perfect agreement, while dotted and dashed lines correspond to ±0.2 dex and ±0.4 dex, respectively. the data returns a correlation coeﬃcient R2 = 0.06. Another evidence that our surface gravities are reliable is the excellent agreement between the spectroscopic values obtained for the star HD 185351 and the asteroseismic measurement presented by Johnson et al. (2014), as discussed in Section 3.2.

4.3. Validation of the Metallicities

Photometric metallicities are not as precise as the spectroscopic ones, so they do not provide a good reference to validate our results. In order to do that, we decided to perform an analysis of the

Hyades stars studied by Dutra-Ferreira et al. (2016). The reduced spectra were kindly made available 20 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

∆

−

− − −

∆eff

Figure 7. Differences between spectroscopic and trigonometric surface gravities as a function of the differences between spectroscopic and photometric effective temperatures. by Let´ıcia Dutra-Ferreira and the S/N values were taken from Table 1 of the corresponding paper. We analyzed all 17 stars (14 dwarfs and 3 giants) in the same way as our targets (see Section 3.2). The average metallicity found for the cluster was h[Fe/H]i = 0.16 ± 0.04, which is in very good agreement with the value recommended by Dutra-Ferreira et al. (2016) (0.18 ± 0.03). The mean metallicities for the dwarfs (0.16 ± 0.04) and the giants (0.15 ± 0.02) are in excellent agreement, which shows that our line list is capable of providing a consistent metallicity scale for stars in a wide range of effective temperatures and in different evolutionary stages. Moreover, we do not find any trends in [Fe/H] as a function of Teff , which is an additional evidence that our metallicity scale is consistent. Finally, the average metallicity obtained for the giants is consistent with the value obtained by Dutra-Ferreira et al. (2016) (0.14 ± 0.03) when using an optimized line list in a classical Retired A Stars Revisited 21 spectroscopic analysis. This result supports the fact that the metallicity scale for the subgiants is reliable.

4.4. Comparison with the SPOCS Catalogues

The parameters used by Johnson et al. (2010a) were obtained from the Spectroscopic Properties of Cool Stars (SPOCS) catalog and derived through spectral synthesis using the Spectroscopy Made Easy (SME) software (Valenti & Fischer 2005). They thus provide an additional independent check for the results derived in this work. All stars in our sample have SME parameters and the average differences (in the sense this work - SPOCS) are: ∆Teff = -8 ± 165 K, ∆[Fe/H] = -0.04 ± 0.14 dex and ∆log g = -0.08 ± 0.34 dex. Although the mean differences are reasonable, the dispersions are larger than the typical external uncertainties. This is also clear from Figure 8, where we can also see

2 some trends in the residuals, especially as a function of [Fe/H] (R = 0.50, 0.41 and 0.42 for ∆Teﬀ , ∆[Fe/H] and ∆log g, respectively). A similar comparison for the masses yields an average diﬀerence (in the sense this work - SPOCS) of

∆M⋆= 0.05 ± 0.28 M⊙. Again, the mean difference is good, but the dispersion too large. As clearly seen in Figure 9, a significant trend is present in the residuals (R2 = 0.43), probably a consequence of the trends observed for the atmospheric parameters. The most recent version of the SPOCS catalog (Brewer et al. 2016) contains atmospheric parameters and chemical abundances for 1626 FGK stars. For the 204 stars in common with our data set, the average differences (in the sense this work - SPOCS) are: ∆Teff = 48 ± 38 K, ∆[Fe/H] = -0.04 ± 0.05 dex and ∆log g = -0.01 ± 0.09 dex. Note that Brewer et al. (2016) adopted a lower reference solar iron abundance (A(Fe) = 7.45), so we applied a correction of -0.05 dex for all SPOCS [Fe/H] values in order to put their metallicities into our scale. There is a considerable improvement in the dispersions, however a few trends in the residuals are still present, in particular for ∆[Fe/H] versus log g (R2 = 0.58), getting stronger for the more evolved stars (log g . 3.5). Similar trends are found by Brewer et al. (2016) when comparing their results with other spectroscopic analyzes, but their origin remain unclear. Possible explanations could be the strong correlations observed between Teff , [Fe/H] and log g when spectral synthesis is used (e.g., Torres et al. 2012) or 22 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

4 4 4

eff eff eff ∆ ∆ ∆

eff 4 4 4 4

4 4 4

eff eff

4 4 4

∆ ∆ ∆ 4 4 4 4 4

eff

∆ ∆ ∆ 4 4 4

eff

Figure 8. Comparison between the atmospheric parameters derived in this work (see Section 3.2) and those used by Johnson et al. (2010a). The left column of panels shows the direct comparisons between the two sets of parameters. The other three columns present the diﬀerences between the two sets of parameters (in the sense this work - SPOCS) as a function of, from left to right, Teﬀ , [Fe/H] and log g from the SPOCS catalog. In all panels, solid lines represent a perfect agreement. Dotted and dashed lines correspond, respectively, to

∆Teff = ±100 K and ±200 K, ∆[Fe/H]= ±0.1 dex and ±0.2 dex or ∆log g= ±0.2 dex and ±0.4 dex. the fixed value for the microturbulence (0.85 km s−1) adopted in SME. We stress that the standard spectroscopic analysis employed in this work shows no such correlations (Torres et al. 2012) and our results are in good agreement with those obtained from independent methods. Brewer et al. (2016) also determined rotational velocities and we compare our values with theirs in Figure 10. For the 204 stars in common, the average difference (in the sense this work - SPOCS) is ∆v sin i = -0.25 ± 0.73 km s−1. The stars with differences larger than 2.0 km s−1 are HD 31543 (-5.4 Retired A Stars Revisited 23

⊙ 1

⊙

1 1 1

⊙

Figure 9. Comparison between the masses derived in this work (see Section 3.4) and those used by Johnson et al. (2010a). The upper panel shows the direct comparison between the two sets of parameters.

The lower panel presents the diﬀerence ∆M⋆= M⋆(This Work) - M⋆(SPOCS) as a function of the latter. In both panels, solid lines represent a perfect agreement, while dotted and dashed lines correspond to ±0.1

M⊙ and ±0.2 M⊙, respectively. km s−1), a possible single-lined spectroscopic binary (SB1; Chubak et al. 2012), and HD 103616 (-2.8 km s−1), a suspected binary (Nordstr¨om et al. 2004).

4.5. Possible Systematic Oﬀsets on the Masses

4.5.1. Possible Oﬀsets in the Atmospheric Parameters

In the previous sections, we showed that the spectroscopic atmospheric parameters of the subgiants are accurate. Ghezzi & Johnson (2015) showed that PARSEC evolutionary tracks (da Silva et al. 2006) and the PARAM code are able to provide reliable masses for a sample of 59 benchmark subgiants and giants. Nevertheless, we decided to test if the masses of subgiants could be signiﬁcantly 24 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

− i

s v 0

− 0 i s

0 0 vsi−

Figure 10. Comparison between the rotational velocities derived in this work (see Section 3.3) and those determined by Brewer et al. (2016). The upper panel shows the direct comparison between the two sets of parameters. The lower panel presents the difference ∆v sin i = v sin i (This Work) - v sin i (SPOCS) as a function of the latter. In both panels, solid lines represent a perfect agreement, while dotted and dashed lines correspond to ±1.0 km s−1 and ±2.0 km s−1, respectively. overestimated if systematic offsets were present in the input atmospheric parameters derived in this work (Teff and [Fe/H]). In order to do this, we decreased all our effective temperatures and metallicities by 100 K and 0.10 dex, respectively. The offset in Teff was chosen so that we would have a decrease in the stellar masses and is consistent with typical external uncertainties (see Section 3.2) found in the literature when different studies are compared (but higher than the internal errors derived here). We should also note that the offsets are consistent, in the sense that such a decrease of ∼100 K in the Teff for a typical Retired A Star (Teff ∼ 5000 K) would cause a decrease in the iron abundance of about ∼0.1 dex (see Table 4). Retired A Stars Revisited 25

Using these new parameters, we repeated the analysis done in Section 3.4. The comparison of the new set of masses with the original ones can be seen in Figure 11. As expected, the new masses are smaller than the original ones. The average difference (in the sense no offset - with offset in the atmospheric parameters) is 0.20 ± 0.14 M⊙. Considering the typical uncertainty of the original masses is 0.11 M⊙, this difference is consistent with a 2σ offset and much smaller than the possible overestimation of up to 50% suggested by Lloyd (2011). We should also highlight that the Teff and [Fe/H] offsets used in this test are much larger than the average difference between our spectroscopic and photometric temperatures (-27 K) and the offsets in the metallicities scales obtained for the Hyades stars (-0.02, with our values being smaller), respectively. Therefore, we feel confident that possible offsets in the atmospheric parameters are small (if present) and do not significantly overestimate the masses of the subgiants.

4.5.2. Eﬀect of the Reddening

Another input parameter that can affect the determination of the masses is the reddening. In order to test how much the reddening corrections could overestimate our masses, we decide to repeat the analysis done in Section 3.4 considering AV = 0 for all stars in our sample. The comparison of these new results with the original ones is shown in Figure 12. As expected, masses obtained without correcting the V magnitudes for the reddening are smaller, however the difference is not significant.

The mean diﬀerence (in the sense with reddening - without reddening) is 0.05 ± 0.05 M⊙, a value that is smaller than the typical uncertainty of 0.11 M⊙. Therefore, we see that the reddening correction does not signiﬁcantly increase the masses of the subgiants.

4.5.3. Gaia’s Parallaxes

Gaia’s ﬁrst data release8 (DR1; Gaia Collaboration 2016) presents trigonometric parallaxes for ∼2 million stars in common with Hipparcos (ESA 1997) and Tycho-2 Catalogues (Høg et al. 2000). We found 208 stars from our sample in DR1 and decided to compare Gaia’s new parallaxes with the Hipparcos revised values adopted in this work (van Leeuwen 2007) (see Figure 13). The average

8 http://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/gaia/dr1 26 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

60 Original Parameters Parameters with Offsets 50

30 Number of Stars of Number 20

0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

M (M ⊙)

Figure 11. Comparison between the mass distributions obtained with the original atmospheric parameters derived in this work (solid red histogram) and the ones obtained with the offsets of -100 K in Teff and -0.1 dex in [Fe/H] (black dotted histogram). difference (in the sense Hipparcos - Gaia) is 0.25 ± 1.30 mas or 3 ± 20 %. We should highlight that Stassun & Torres (2016) found the exact same systematic offset for a sample of eclipsing binaries with accurate empirical distances.

Although the average difference is small, there are a few stars with discrepancies between 50% and 100%. Thus, we decided to test if the masses of the subgiants are affected by the parallax choice. When using Gaia’s parallaxes for the 208 stars in common (and not considering the remaining 37 stars), we obtain masses that are on average higher than those derived with Hipparcos parallaxes by 0.08 ± 0.21 M⊙ or 6 ± 14 %. We see that the choice of Hipparcos parallaxes provides slightly lower masses, so they are not causing any systematic effects that would overestimate the masses of the subgiants. We decided not to use Gaia’s parallaxes for now because the astrometric results from Retired A Stars Revisited 27

60 With Reddening Without Reddening 50

30 Number of Stars of Number 20

0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

M (M ⊙)

Figure 12. Comparison between the mass distributions obtained with (solid red histogram) and without (black dotted histogram) correcting the V magnitudes for the reddening.

DR1 are still preliminary. However, we anticipate that this particular choice does not aﬀect the conclusions drawn from this study.

4.6. Validation of Space Velocities

Space velocities calculated in Section 3.5 can also be compared with values from the literature. Our sample has 114 stars that were also analyzed by Schlaufman & Winn (2013). As can be seen in

Figure 14, there is a very good agreement between the two sets, with the following average differences (in the sense this work - SW): ∆U = -0.01 ± 1.08 km s−1, ∆V = -0.15 ± 1.73 km s−1 and ∆W = -0.28 ± 1.42 km s−1. Six stars (HD 11970, HD 126991, HD 158038, HD 180053, HD 193342 and HD 203471) present higher than average differences, which are related to different values adopted for the radial velocities. 28 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

0 π

0 0 0 00

0 π π 0 ∆

0 0 0 π

Figure 13. Upper panel: Comparison between Gaia’s new parallaxes and the Hipparcos revised values adopted in this work. The black solid line represents a perfect agreement, while dotted and dashed lines show ±2.5 mas and ±5 mas offsets, respectively. Lower panel: Percentual differences (in the sense Hipparcos - Gaia) between the two sets of parallaxes. The black solid line shows a null difference. Dotted and dashed lines represent 50% and 100% differences.

Our sample also has 28 stars in common with the Geneva Copenhagen Catalog (Casagrande et al. 2011). The agreement between the two sets of values is good and the average diﬀerences (in the sense this work - GC) are: ∆U = 0.95 ± 2.81 km s−1, ∆V = 1.39 ± 6.17 km s−1 and ∆W = -0.97

± 4.98 km s−1. Three stars (HD 11970, HD 31543 and HD 64730) present large differences in the space velocities and are basically responsible for the relatively high dispersions around the averages. These differences can be traced back to distinct values adopted for the radial velocities. These two comparisons confirm that our UV W velocities are consistent with previous values from the literature, and thus are reliable for being used in the following discussions. Retired A Stars Revisited 29

−

− − −

− ∆ − − −

Figure 14. Comparison between UVW velocities (blue, green and red points, respectively) derived in this work and those from Schlaufman & Winn (2013). The black solid line represents a perfect agreement. Dotted and dashed lines show, respectively, ±10 km s−1 and ±20 km s−1 oﬀsets, arbitrarily chosen for reference. Lower panel: Absolute diﬀerences (in the sense this work - SW) between the two sets of space velocities. The lines are the same as in the upper panel.

5. DISCUSSION

5.1. Consistency between Masses and Kinematics

One of the main concerns regarding the Retired A Stars is that their masses may not be consistent with their space velocities (Schlaufman & Winn 2013). If these stars are indeed the evolved counterparts of A dwarfs, we would expect their velocity dispersions to be smaller than those that would be observed if they were actually F and G stars while on the main sequence. Using solar neighborhood samples deﬁned within the Hipparcos catalog, Schlaufman & Winn (2013) showed that subgiant 30 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

⊙

1 1 1 − − − − − −

− − −

− − − − − − − − − − − −

−1 −1 −1

Figure 15. Galactic UVW space velocities for 244 of our subgiants (HD 10245 did not have an available radial velocity). Stars with masses M⋆< 1.6 M⊙ and M⋆≥ 1.6 M⊙ are represented by blue and red points, respectively. The black solid and dashed lines show the 95% velocity ellipsoids for, respectively, the samples of main-sequence A5-F0 and F5-G5 Hipparcos stars, as deﬁned in Schlaufman & Winn (2013). planet-hosting stars9 are more likely to have evolved from main-sequence F5-G5 rather than A5-F0 stars. In Figure 15, we compare the space velocities derived in this work for the subgiants with the 95% velocity ellipsoids for the samples of main-sequence A5-F0 and F5-G5 Hipparcos stars, taken from Schlaufman & Winn (2013). It should be noted that these stars have mean distances of 100 ± 44 pc and 62 ± 23 pc, thus sampling the solar neighborhood. With an average distance of 141 ± 54 pc, our targets sample a very similar volume. If we consider our targets with fractional uncertainties in the parallax lower than 20% (following Schlaufman & Winn 2013), the fractions of subgiants within the A5-F0 95% velocity ellipsoids are: 54% for UV, 48% for UW and 47% for VW. However, if we restrict our sample to M⋆≥ 1.6 M⊙, these fractions increase to 67%, 63% and 71%, respectively.

Following equation 1 from Schlaufman & Winn (2013), we calculated δi values for each star in their A5-F0 and F5-G5 samples, as well as for our sample of subgiants. We compare these distributions using a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and again considering only stars with fractional uncertainties in the parallax lower than 20%. The probability that the subgiants and the A5-F0 stars are drawn from the same parent population is ∼10−38, but much higher (≈0.06) when compared to the F5-G5 stars.

9 Their sample is diﬀerent from the ones analyzed here and in Johnson et al. (2010a). Retired A Stars Revisited 31

If we now use only Retired A Stars (i.e., stars with M⋆≥ 1.6 M⊙), the former probability increases to ∼10−6 and the latter decreases to ≈0.05. Although the agreement is much better, this result still supports the idea that the kinematics of the Retired A Stars would imply they were in fact FG dwarfs while on the main sequence. Schlaufman & Winn (2013) apparently did not use any reddening corrections before selecting the sample of A5-F0 stars. Using a similar procedure as the one described in Section 3.4, we derived AV and E(B − V ) ≈ AV /3.1 values for all stars in their sample. Applying these corrections, respectively, to their absolute magnitudes MV and colors B − V , we obtain a new group of main-sequence A5-F0 stars following the selection criteria in Schlaufman & Winn (2013): 0.15 < B−V < 0.30, 1.9 < MV <

2.7 and σπ/π < 0.20. Deﬁning the new corresponding 95% velocity ellipsoids, the fractions of Retired

A Stars σπ/π < 0.20 within them are: 77% for UV, 79% for UW and 85% for VW. These numbers are signiﬁcantly higher than those obtained for the original ellipsoids from Schlaufman & Winn (2013).

Because reddening was not accounted for, the MV and B − V intervals were including brighter and hotter stars, which naturally define smaller ellipsoids. As this effect could explain the apparent inconsistency between kinematics and mass, we applied reddening corrections to the selection of A5-F0 and F5-G5 stars and performed new KS tests. The probabilities that these samples and the Retired A Stars are drawn from the same parent population are ≈0.0003 and ≈0.02, respectively. Although reddening corrections make the A5-F0 sample more consistent with the Retired A Stars, it is not able to explain the apparent inconsistency between their kinematics and masses. The last test was to check if the uncertainties on the masses contributed to this inconsistency. Using steps of 0.01 M⊙ for offsets in the masses of the Retired A Stars, we discovered that, for a decrease of only 0.12 M⊙, we can no longer reject the null hypothesis that they are drawn from the same parent population as the A5-F0 stars (p ≈ 0.03), as defined by Schlaufman & Winn (2013). At this point, the probability that our stars and their F5-G5 sample are drawn from the same distribution is p ≈ 0.009. If reddening corrections are considered in the selection of the A5-F0 and F5-G5 samples

(see discussion above), the transition occurs for an even smaller decrease in mass: 0.04 M⊙. For this 32 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson oﬀset, the probabilities that the Retired A Stars and A5-F0 and F5-G5 stars are drawn from the same parent population are p ≈ 0.02 and p ≈ 0.008, respectively. Therefore, we can conclude that masses derived from evolutionary tracks and the kinematics of the Retired A Stars are consistent within the expected uncertainties of these two diﬀerent approaches, especially if reddening is considered.

5.2. Consistency between Masses and Rotational Velocities

Another concern regarding the Retired A Stars is that their masses may not be consistent with their rotational velocities (Lloyd 2011). Stellar rotation is a strong function of both mass and evolutionary stage. Stars born with masses above the Kraft break (∼1.3M⊙; Kraft 1967) have progressively thinner convective envelopes, or no surface convection at all. Therefore, angular momentum loss through magnetic winds is negligible or absent during the main sequence and they remain as rapid rotators until the end of this evolutionary stage. As these stars evolve across the subgiant branch however, a convective zone develops in the expanding and cooling envelope and magnetic winds are also produced. These eﬀects combined decrease the stellar rotation rate. Therefore, the analysis of the rotation of subgiants provides a powerful diagnostics for stellar mass (e.g., van Saders & Pinsonneault

2013).

Lloyd (2011) noted that three of the evolved planet hosts with 1.6 M⊙ < M⋆< 2.0 M⊙ had lower than expected rotational velocities when compared to ﬁeld stars in the same mass range and in similar evolutionary stages. This discrepancy suggested that they were in fact the evolved counterparts of less massive stars and, mass determinations for two of them were shown to be erroneous. We should note that, besides the studies quoted by Lloyd (2011), Ghezzi et al. (2010b) also showed that HD

154857 has M⋆ = 1.21 M⊙ using a similar method as the one described in this work. HD 102956, on the other hand, was analyzed here and it is indeed massive (1.67 ± 0.10 M⊙). It has log g= 3.38 ±

0.16 and v sin i = 1.6 ± 0.6 km s−1, thus being consistent with both planet hosting and field stars in the lower panel of Figure 1 from Lloyd (2011). Unfortunately, HD 190228 was not analyzed in our study, but recent determinations confirm its a lower mass star with 1.18 M⊙ (Jofréet al. 2015). In order to address this concern regarding the actual sample of Retired A Stars (note that Lloyd

2011 did not use the sample from Johnson et al. 2010a), we analyzed their rotational velocities (see Retired A Stars Revisited 33

Section 3.3) as a function of their masses (see Section 3.4) and evolutionary stages (represented by log g; see Section 3.2) in Figure 16. We can observe a very good agreement with the ﬁeld stars shown in Figure 1 of Lloyd (2011). In the lower panel of this ﬁgure, no stars with log g & 3.6 have v sin i

. 2.5 km s−1. In our sample, only one star is found in this region: HD 171264. It has log g = 3.65

−1 ± 0.04, M⋆ = 1.64 ± 0.08 M⊙ and v sin i = 1.4 ± 0.8 km s . Thus, it is consistent with the ﬁeld stars from Lloyd (2011) within the uncertainties. We should also note that the value of v sin i = 2.4 km s−1 from Brewer et al. (2016) is consistent with the lower limit determined by the ﬁeld stars.

This sample also seems to have an upper limit of ≈5 km s−1 for stars with log g . 3.4. One star in our sample appears above this limit: HD 150331. It is a G0/2 bright giant (see Section 3.2) with a mass of 2.05 M⊙ and an age of 1 Gyr (see Table 3.4). In conclusion, the rotational velocities provide another conﬁrmation that masses of the Retired A Stars were not overestimated.

5.3. Giant Planet-Metallicity-Mass Correlation

In the previous sections, we showed that the atmospheric and evolutionary parameters derived for the subgiants are reliable. We now use these results to investigate how the formation of giant planets is inﬂuenced by stellar mass and metallicity. We follow the method described in Johnson et al.

(2010a) or Montet et al. (2014) and adopt a similar function to describe the fraction of stars with giant planets:

α βF f(M⋆, F )= CM⋆ 10 (2)

In the above equation, M⋆ is the stellar mass in M⊙ and F ≡ [Fe/H] is the stellar metallicity. The free parameters α, β and C are determined so the likelihood conditioned on the data is maximized.

We decided to use uniform priors within the following intervals: α = (0.00, 3.00) with 0.05 steps, β = (0.00, 3.00) with 0.05 steps and C = (0.005, 0.150) with 0.005 steps. The ﬁrst test consists in our best eﬀort to mimic as closely as possible the analysis done by Johnson et al. (2010a) and check if we are able to recover their results: α = 1.00, β = 1.20 and

C = 0.07. The respective conﬁdence intervals are: (0.70, 1.30), (1.00, 1.40) and (0.06, 0.08). As we 34 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

M < 1.3 M 9 1.3 M ⊙ M < 1.6 M

8 M 1.6 M

6 ) 1 − 5 (km s (km i 4 sin v 3

2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 log g

Figure 16. Rotational velocities v sin i for the subgiants as a function of log g. Stars with masses M⋆< 1.3

M⊙, 1.3 M⊙ ≤ M⋆< 1.6 M⊙ and M⋆≥ 1.6 M⊙ (i.e., Retired A Stars) are represented by open, blue and red circles, respectively. The black dashed and dotted lines show the limits v sin i =3and5kms−1 discussed in the text. Stars with error bars are discussed in the text. can see in the ﬁrst line of Table 9, our results are consistent with these values within the conﬁdence intervals.

We then used the sample of FGKM dwarfs of Johnson et al. (2010a), but replaced their subgiants with our own sample. It should be noted that this was not just an update of the parameters. The sample of subgiants in this work is not the same as the one from Johnson et al. (2010a), there are 56 different objects. Some stars were included because they now fulfill the requirement of at least nine observations, while others were removed due to scientific reasons (e.g., confirmation that they are binaries or poor RV measurements due to enhanced activity or variability). Retired A Stars Revisited 35

Since we are only interested in the giant planets in this work, we considered stars that have detected planets with real or minimum masses larger than 0.50 MJup. This is almost twice Saturn’s mass and close to the detection limit of 0.44 MJup for a 0.4 M⊙ star described in Johnson et al. (2010a). If a star only has planets less massive than this limit, we treat it as if it does not have planets in the following analyses. We also used this lower limit to update the list of planet hosts in the FGKM sample. With these constraints, we obtain a new giant planet occurrence relation and see that our overall occurrence parameter, C, increases, which is expected since, as our mass threshold is lower and time baseline longer than Johnson et al. (2010a), there are more detected planets in our revised sample. The values of α and β change by the same amount, in opposite directions, but within the errors in both cases (see the second line of Table 9).

Still using our results for the subgiants, we replaced the parameters and uncertainties of the M stars by those from Montet et al. (2014). Whenever available, we also adopted parameters and errors from Brewer et al. (2016) for the FGK dwarfs, keeping the results from Johnson et al. (2010a) otherwise. This is our complete and updated sample of 1225 stars and it is depicted in Figure 17. Although there are some stars with very low metallicities, we highlight that there are no selection biases that cause a correlation between these quantity and the stellar masses. A linear fit to the entire set of stars returns a correlation coefficient R2 = 0.08. When this complete sample is used, we notice slight changes in both α and β, but again the results are consistent with the previous values within the uncertainties (see the third line of Table 9 and Eq. 3). Schlaufman & Winn (2013) mention that a systematic offset as small as ≈+0.05 in the metallicities of the Retired A Stars could explain the larger occurrence rate of giant planets around them. In fact, our metallicities are, on average, 0.04 dex smaller than those of Johnson et al. (2010a) and

Brewer et al. (2016) (see Section 4.4). Despite this, we can still see an increased occurrence rate of giant planets around more massive stars. We saw in Section 4.3 that there is no reason to believe that our [Fe/H] values would be systematically higher for evolved stars relative to dwarfs. However, for completeness, we decided to test 36 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

0 00 0 0 0 0

⊙

Figure 17. Masses and metallicities for our complete sample of 1225 M (blue), FGK (green) and subgiants (red). Filled squares and open circles represent stars with and without planets, respectively. whether corrections to the metallicity scale (-0.05 and -0.10 dex) would change our results. We can see in Table 9 that the dependence of the occurrence rate of giant planets on metallicity decreases. As a consequence, the dependence on mass becomes increasingly stronger. Thus, if the Retired A

Stars were more metal-poor, then planet formation would be a steeper function of stellar mass in order to explain the giant planets detected at the high-mass end of our sample.

We saw in Section 5.1 that a decrease of only 0.12 M⊙ in the masses of the Retired A Stars is sufficient to reconcile their kinematics with the velocity dispersions of a sample of A5-F0 dwarfs. As this offset is almost equal to the typical uncertainties in our mass determinations, we tested how it affects the occurrence rate. Table 9 shows that the effect of this mass offest is negligible. Therefore, the correlation between giant planets, metallicity and mass is robust against the typical errors in the latter. Retired A Stars Revisited 37

As discussed in Section 4.5.1, a decrease in [Fe/H] will cause a decrease in mass, so these parameters are not independent. In order to account for this, we tested how giant planet occurrence is aﬀected by simultaneous oﬀsets in the metallicities (-0.05 and -0.10 dex) and masses (-0.12 M⊙) of the subgiants.

The results in Table 9 reveal a significant decrease in β and an increase in α, in a similar manner as observed when only [Fe/H] is altered. These results confirm that giant planet occurrence is a clear function of both metallicity and mass and was not artificially produced by uncertainties or systematic offsets in any or both of these parameters. The best functional form to describe this dependence is (see also Figure 18):

+0.28 . 1.05 . +0 21 +0.008 −0 24 1.05−0.17F f(M⋆, F )=0.085−0.010M⋆ 10 (3)

It is interesting to note that, in the previous tests, both α and β always change in opposite directions, meaning that lower metallicities can be compensated by larger masses and vice-versa (as already suggested in Ghezzi et al. 2010b). Therefore, it seems that the formation of giant planets depends on

[Fe/H] the quantity M⋆×10 . In order to test this, we now describe planet occurrence in the following way:

F γ f(M⋆, F )= C(M⋆ × 10 ) (4)

As before, the free parameters γ and C are determined so the likelihood conditioned on the data is maximized. We decided to use uniform priors within the following intervals: γ = (0.00, 2.30) with 0.02 steps and C = (0.002, 0.150) with 0.002 steps. Using the most updated results for all stars, we obtain the following best functional form to describe this dependence (see also Figure 19):

+0.12 +0.008 F 1.04−0.16 f(M⋆, F )=0.086−0.010(M⋆ × 10 ) (5)

We note that the best value for γ is very close to 1.00. Oﬀsets applied to the metallicities and/or masses of the subgiants did not change the results signiﬁcantly (see Table 10). If we remember that

Md ∝ M⋆, where Md and M⋆are the masses of the protoplanetary disk and stellar host, respectively 38 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

2.0

1.5

1.0 α

0.5

0.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 C α

Figure 18. Marginal posterior probability density functions for the parameters α, β and C conditioned on the data. Lines represent the 68%, 95% and 99.7% contours (from smaller to larger). The crosses represent the best-ﬁtting values from Johnson et al. (2010a): α = 1.00, β = 1.20 and C = 0.07.

[Fe/H] (Andrews et al. 2013), the quantity M⋆×10 can be considered as proxy for the amount of metals in the disk from which planets formed. In this scenario, our results reveal that the formation of giant planets is an almost linear function of the amount of metals in the protoplanetary disk, going from

≈2% in the interval 0.0 – 0.5 M⊙ to ≈24% between 2.0 – 2.5 M⊙ (see Figure 20). The behavior beyond this interval is too uncertain due to low number statistics. Independently of the functional form chosen, our results provide a strong support for the core accretion hypothesis (Ida & Lin 2004).

6. CONCLUSIONS

We determined atmospheric (eﬀective temperature, metallicity and surface gravity), rotational (v sin i), evolutionary (mass, radius and age) and kinematical (UV W space velocities) parameters for a sample of 245 subgiants. Thorough tests and comparisons showed that our results agree well Retired A Stars Revisited 39

1.6

1.2 γ

0.8

0.4 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 C

Figure 19. Same as Figure 18, but now for parameters γ and C. with those determined using other methods and exhibit acceptable offsets when systematic errors are applied to the input data. In particular, we estimate the typical uncertainties on the masses to be 0.11 M⊙, while a maximum offset of 0.20 M⊙ could be present if the input parameters were simultaneously affected by systematic errors. This larger value would correspond to an error of . 13%, much lower than the 50% overestimate suggested by Lloyd (2011, 2013). We also presented a simple explanation to the apparent inconsistency between their masses and kinematics observed by Schlaufman & Winn (2013). By restricting our sample to Retired A Stars

(i.e., stars with M⋆≥ 1.6 M⊙) and applying an oﬀset of just -0.12 M⊙, the velocity dispersions become consistent with the main-sequence A5-F0 stars from Schlaufman & Winn (2013). If reddening is considered for the latter sample, this oﬀset decreases to 0.04 M⊙. The rotational velocities derived for our targets corroborated that the Retired A Stars are indeed massive, contrary to the concerns 40 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3 Planet Fraction Planet 0.2

0.1

0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 [Fe/H] M x 10 (M ⊙)

Figure 20. Fraction of stars with planets as a function of the amount of metals in the protoplanetary disk. raised by Lloyd (2011). Therefore, a thorough and simultaneous analysis of kinematics, rotation and masses conﬁrm that the latter were not signiﬁcantly overestimated within the expected errors for the

Retired A Stars. Having confirmed the masses and metallicities derived in this study are reliable, we extended our sample with main-sequence FGKM stars from Johnson et al. (2010a), but adopted updated parameters from Montet et al. (2014) and Brewer et al. (2016) (whenever available) and accounted for the most recent giant planet detections. This sample of 1225 stars was used to study the correlation between giant planet occurrence and both stellar mass and metallicity. We confirm recent results (e.g. Johnson et al. 2010a; Reffert et al. 2015; Jones et al. 2016) that show there is a higher probability of forming giant planets around more massive and metal-rich stars up to ∼2.0 – 2.5 M⊙. Tests with offsets in metallicity, mass or both confirm that this correlation is real, and not artificially produced by systematic uncertainties. Since mass and metallicity seem to be equally important for the formation of giant planets, we also

[Fe/H] γ studied planet occurrence as a function of (M∗ × 10 ) . This quantity can be thought as the Retired A Stars Revisited 41

total amount of metals in the protoplanetary disk, assuming that Md ∝ M⋆(Andrews et al. 2013). We observed that the formation of giant planets is an almost linear function of the total amount of metals in the protoplanetary disk (γ ≈ 1). This result agrees with the suggestion given by Ghezzi et al.

(2010b) and provides another strong evidence that most (if not all) giant planets form through the core accretion mechanism (e.g., Ida & Lin 2004). This study also highlights the crucial role detailed stellar characterization plays on a complete understanding of planet formation. In this sense, our team continues to follow-up and analyze samples of evolved stars with the goal of obtaining more accurate and precise models for the giant planet-mass-metallicity correlations. New planet detections and updated stellar parameters will be presented in future contributions. 42 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

This work has made use of: SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France; VALD database, operated at Uppsala University, the Institute of Astronomy RAS in Moscow, and the University of Vienna; NASA’s Astrophysics Data System (ADS) and Exoplanet Archive.

The authors would like to thank Leo Girardi for kindly sharing the PARAM code, Kevian Schlauf- man for providing data for the discussion regarding the kinematics and Let´ıcia Dutra-Ferreira for making the reduced spectra of the Hyades stars available. We also thank the referee for their in- sightful comments, which led to a much improved manuscript. LG would like to thank the financial support from Coordena¸cão de Aperfei¸coamento de Pessoal de N´ıvel Superior (CAPES), Ciência sem Fronteiras, Harvard College Observatory, and Funda¸cão Lemann. JAJ is grateful for the generous grant support provided by the Alfred P. Sloan and David & Lucile Packard foundations. Work by B.T.M. was performed in part under contract with the California Institute of Technology (Cal- tech)/Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) funded by NASA through the Sagan Fellowship Program executed by the NASA Exoplanet Science Institute.

Facility: Keck (HIRES)

Software: numpy (Van Der Walt et al. 2011), matplotlib (Hunter et al. 2007), MOOG (Sneden 1973) IRAF, PARAM, astrolibpy

REFERENCES

Anderson, E., & Francis, C. 2012, Astronomy Barklem, P. S., Piskunov, N., & O’Mara, B. J. Letters, 38, 331 2000, A&AS, 142, 467 Andrews, S. M., Rosenfeld, K. A., Kraus, A. L., & Bedell, M., Mel´endez, J., Bean, J. L., et al. 2014, Wilner, D. J. 2013, ApJ, 771, 129 ApJ, 795, 23 Arenou, F., Grenon, M., & Gomez, A. 1992, A&A, Bressan, A., Marigo, P., Girardi, L., et al. 2012, 258, 104 MNRAS, 427, 127 Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, Brewer, J. M., Fischer, D. A., Valenti, J. A., & P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481 Piskunov, N. 2016, ApJS, 225, 32 Barklem, P. S., & Aspelund-Johansson, J. 2005, Butler, R. P., Johnson, J. A., Marcy, G. W., et al. A&A, 435, 373 2006, PASP, 118, 1685 Retired A Stars Revisited 43

Butler, R. P., Marcy, G. W., Williams, E., et al. Fischer, D. A., & Valenti, J. A. 2005, ApJ, 622, 1996, PASP, 108, 500 1102

Campante, T. L., Veras, D., North, T. S. H., et al. Fressin, F., Torres, G., Charbonneau, D., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 1360 2013, ApJ, 766, 81

Carroll, B. W., & Ostlie, D. A. 2006, An Gaidos, E., Fischer, D. A., Mann, A. W., & Introduction to Modern Astrophysics, 2nd Howard, A. W. 2013, ApJ, 771, 18

edition. (San Francisco, CA: Pearson, Ghezzi, L., Cunha, K., Smith, V. V., de Ara´ujo, Addison-Wesley) F. X., Schuler, S., & de la Reza, R. 2010, ApJ, Casagrande, L., Ram´ırez, I., Mel´endez, J., Bessell, 720, 1290

M., & Asplund, M. 2010, A&A, 512, A54 Ghezzi, L., Cunha, K., Schuler, S. C., & Smith, Casagrande, L., Schönrich, R., Asplund, M., et al. V. V. 2010, ApJ, 725, 721 2011, A&A, 530, A138 Ghezzi, L., & Johnson, J. A. 2015, ApJ, 812, 96 Castelli, F., & Kurucz, R. L. 2004, in IAU Symp. Girardi, L., Groenewegen, M. A. T., 210, Modelling of Stellar Atmospheres, ed. N. Hatziminaoglou, E., & da Costa, L. 2005, A&A, Piskunov, et al. (Dordrecht: Kluwer), poster 436, 895 A20 (arXiv:astro-ph/0405087) Gontcharov, G. A. 2006, Astronomy Letters, 32, Chabrier, G. 2001, ApJ, 554, 1274 759 Chubak, C., Marcy, G., Fischer, D. A., et al. 2012, Gontcharov, G. A., & Mosenkov, A. V. 2017, arXiv:1207.6212 MNRAS, 472, 3805 Cutri, R. M., et al. 2003, The IRSA 2MASS Gonzalez, G. 1997, MNRAS, 285, 403 All-Sky Point Source Catalog, NASA/IPAC González Hernández, J. I., & Bonifacio, P. 2009, Infrared Science Archive A&A, 497, 497 da Silva, L., Girardi, L., Pasquini, L., et al. 2006, Hakkila, J., Myers, J. M., Stidham, B. J., & A&A, 458, 609 Hartmann, D. H. 1997, AJ, 114, 2043 Demarque, P., Woo, J.-H., Kim, Y.-C., & Yi, S. K. 2004, ApJS, 155, 667 Hinkel, N. R., Young, P. A., Pagano, M. D., et al. 2016, ApJS, 226, 4 Dutra-Ferreira, L., Pasquini, L., Smiljanic, R., Porto de Mello, G. F., & Steffen, M. 2016, Høg, E., Fabricius, C., Makarov, V. V., et al. A&A, 585, A75 2000, A&A, 355, L27 ESA 1997, The Hipparcos and Tycho Catalogues, Hunter, J. D., et al. 2007, Computing in science ESA Special Publication, 1200 (Noordwijk: and engineering, 9, 90 ESA) Ida, S., & Lin, D. N. C. 2004, ApJ, 616, 567 44 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

Jofré, E., Petrucci, R., Saffe, C., et al. 2015, A&A, Nordström, B., Mayor, M., Andersen, J., et al. 574, A50 2004, A&A, 418, 989 Johnson, J. A., Marcy, G. W., Fischer, D. A., et North, T. S. H., Campante, T. L., Miglio, A., et al. 2006, ApJ, 652, 1724 al. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 1866 Johnson, J. A., Aller, K. M., Howard, A. W., & Pavlenko, Y. V., Jenkins, J. S., Jones, H. R. A., Crepp, J. R. 2010, PASP, 122, 905 Ivanyuk, O., & Pinfield, D. J. 2012, MNRAS, Johnson, J. A., Howard, A. W., Bowler, B. P., et 422, 542 al. 2010, PASP, 122, 701 Ram´ırez, I., & Meléndez, J. 2005, ApJ, 626, 465 Johnson, J. A., Huber, D., Boyajian, T., et al. Reffert, S., Bergmann, C., Quirrenbach, A., 2014, ApJ, 794, 15 Trifonov, T., & Künstler, A. 2015, A&A, 574, Johnson & Wright, J. T. 2013, arXiv:1306.6627v1 A116 Johnson, J. A., Morton, T. D., & Wright, J. T. Robin, A. C., Reylé, C., Derrière, S., & Picaud, S. 2013, ApJ, 763, 53 2003, A&A, 409, 523 Jones, M. I., Jenkins, J. S., Brahm, R., et al. 2016, Ryabchikova, T., Piskunov, N., Kurucz, R. L., et A&A, 590, A38 al. 2015, PhyS, 90, 054005 Kraft, R. P. 1967, ApJ, 150, 551 Schlaufman, K. C., & Winn, J. N. 2013, ApJ, 772, Kurucz, R. L., Furenlid, I., Brault, J., & 143 Testerman, L. 1984, Solar Flux Atlas from 296 Schuler, S. C., Flateau, D., Cunha, K., et al. 2011, to 1300 nm (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press) ApJ, 732, 55 Liu, F., Asplund, M., Ram´ırez, I., Yong, D., & Sneden, C. 1973, PhD thesis, Univ. Texas, Austin Meléndez, J. 2014, MNRAS, 442, L51 Soubiran, C., Le Campion, J.-F., Brouillet, N., & Lloyd, J. P. 2011, ApJL, 739, L49 Chemin, L. 2016, A&A, 591, A118 Lloyd, J. P. 2013, ApJL, 774, L2 Sousa, S. G., Santos, N. C., Adibekyan, V., Mashonkina, L., Gehren, T., Shi, J.-R., Korn, Delgado-Mena, E., & Israelian, G. 2015, A&A, A. J., & Grupp, F. 2011, A&A, 528, A87 577, A67 Massarotti, A., Latham, D. W., Stefanik, R. P., & Sousa, S. G., Santos, N. C., Adibekyan, V., et al. Fogel, J. 2008, AJ, 135, 209 2014, A&A, 561, A21 Montet, B. T., Crepp, J. R., Johnson, J. A., Sousa, S. G., Santos, N. C., Mayor, M., et al. Howard, A. W., & Marcy, G. W. 2014, ApJ, 2008, A&A, 487, 373 781, 28 Sousa, S. G., Santos, N. C., Mortier, A., et al. Niedzielski, A., Villaver, E., Wolszczan, A., et al. 2015, A&A, 576, A94 2015, A&A, 573, A36 Stassun, K. G., & Torres, G. 2016, ApJL, 831, L6 Retired A Stars Revisited 45

Stassun, K. G., Collins, K. A., & Gaudi, B. S. Van Der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C., & Varoquaux, 2017, AJ, 153, 136 G. 2011, Computing in Science & Engineering, Stello, D., Huber, D., Grundahl, F., et al. 2017, 13, 22

MNRAS, 472, 4110 van Leeuwen, F. 2007, A&A, 474, 653 Takeda, Y., & Tajitsu, A. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 397 van Saders, J. L., & Pinsonneault, M. H. 2013, Torres, G., Andersen, J., & Gim´enez, A. 2010, ApJ, 776, 67 A&A Rv, 18, 67 Vogt, S. S., Allen, S. L., Bigelow, B. C., et al. Torres, G., Fischer, D. A., Sozzetti, A., et al. 1994, Proc. SPIE, 2198, 362 2012, ApJ, 757, 161 Tsantaki, M., Sousa, S. G., Adibekyan, V. Z., et Wang, J., & Fischer, D. A. 2015, AJ, 149, 14

al. 2013, A&A, 555, A150 Wright, J. T. 2005, PASP, 117, 657 Valenti, J. A., & Fischer, D. A. 2005, ApJS, 159, 141 46 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

Table 1. Sample of Subgiants.

Star α δ V AV π µα µδ RV S/N

(J2000.0) (J2000.0) (mas) (mas yr−1) (mas yr−1) (km s−1)

HD 1100 003.81777959 -06.13821196 7.762 ± 0.013 0.099 ± 0.035 7.12 ± 0.92 -36.51 -49.99 22.749 199

HD 1293 004.27312298 -01.65301289 8.376 ± 0.016 0.099 ± 0.035 6.31 ± 1.05 25.88 11.56 45.140 241

HD 1384 004.55058081 +52.41254980 8.097 ± 0.013 0.110 ± 0.015 9.34 ± 1.14 -14.90 -56.14 -35.185 144

HD 1502 004.82110857 +14.05475398 8.349 ± 0.015 0.108 ± 0.080 6.28 ± 0.75 74.64 -18.15 -10.024 170

HD 2946 008.14629082 -18.10912237 8.080 ± 0.013 0.099 ± 0.035 7.41 ± 0.94 34.13 15.59 10.460 254

HD 3458 009.34561534 -19.56502439 8.257 ± 0.013 0.099 ± 0.035 3.53 ± 0.80 -3.82 -3.96 -4.607 223

HD 4313 011.41815996 +07.84502103 7.829 ± 0.014 0.100 ± 0.074 7.30 ± 0.76 -5.14 6.69 14.482 181

HD 4395 011.55728796 -11.45237787 7.689 ± 0.013 0.099 ± 0.028 10.56 ± 0.68 -106.18 -38.11 -0.439 249

HD 4917 012.77614783 -12.92760455 8.051 ± 0.015 0.099 ± 0.028 7.44 ± 0.84 21.61 -15.20 -11.482 180

HD 5891 015.13830018 +20.29248280 8.121 ± 0.015 0.396 ± 0.396 3.98 ± 1.21 2.64 -41.89 -96.564 239

HD 6019 015.41505988 +07.30529335 7.732 ± 0.013 0.099 ± 0.073 7.46 ± 0.84 -19.10 -2.42 -23.812 252

HD 6030 015.42870486 +09.74602251 7.863 ± 0.014 0.087 ± 0.065 9.08 ± 1.03 15.12 36.19 -21.000 211

HD 7530 018.78347930 -22.89946990 8.316 ± 0.013 0.098 ± 0.037 6.38 ± 1.32 47.37 3.43 55.245 257

HD 7931 019.63437081 -28.73295461 7.926 ± 0.012 0.100 ± 0.038 8.06 ± 0.76 75.50 5.23 11.248 191

HD 7980 019.85056751 +18.13777069 7.640 ± 0.012 0.141 ± 0.141 7.51 ± 0.68 -73.34 -59.79 -35.830 174

HD 8375 020.90615147 +34.24588758 6.286 ± 0.011 0.060 ± 0.021 17.65 ± 0.39 233.10 117.80 4.600 256

HD 8407 020.76089051 -16.56031152 7.764 ± 0.012 0.098 ± 0.037 10.39 ± 0.94 94.71 64.70 -6.833 233

HD 8508 021.17891865 +36.06390331 7.872 ± 0.012 0.161 ± 0.055 5.61 ± 0.66 46.13 -79.00 9.086 225

HD 9156 022.57801433 +11.09089735 8.428 ± 0.017 0.117 ± 0.087 4.03 ± 0.95 8.41 1.21 28.918 229

HD 9218 022.55779613 -28.86543582 7.956 ± 0.012 0.100 ± 0.038 6.74 ± 0.65 40.96 -9.27 11.171 224

HD 9313 022.97857228 +16.04695686 7.817 ± 0.012 0.088 ± 0.065 9.03 ± 0.74 2.75 -148.06 -14.840 189

HD 9554 023.31615748 -25.66720006 8.355 ± 0.014 0.100 ± 0.036 5.38 ± 0.78 55.53 -32.75 -18.085 221

HD 9625 023.56810341 -06.27259106 8.389 ± 0.015 0.098 ± 0.037 3.13 ± 1.07 -8.21 -28.02 -26.883 212

HD 10011 024.35865432 -15.99768292 7.996 ± 0.013 0.098 ± 0.037 7.68 ± 0.87 69.89 23.34 47.000 225

HD 10212 025.20706456 +45.01895994 8.136 ± 0.014 0.126 ± 0.043 7.70 ± 0.88 -48.86 -50.01 -26.400 233

HD 10245 025.09814690 +07.08658407 8.228 ± 0.015 0.104 ± 0.077 6.84 ± 1.11 2.52 -32.18 ··· 96

Table 1 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 47 Table 1 (continued)

Star α δ V AV π µα µδ RV S/N

(J2000.0) (J2000.0) (mas) (mas yr−1) (mas yr−1) (km s−1)

HD 10383 025.28736342 -09.96857564 8.287 ± 0.017 0.098 ± 0.037 5.86 ± 0.84 -0.89 -34.01 20.676 152

HD 10479 025.51431837 -04.94447815 8.767 ± 0.018 0.098 ± 0.037 3.59 ± 1.06 27.53 19.95 2.045 235

HD 10823 026.49043992 -04.22867213 8.105 ± 0.015 0.098 ± 0.037 7.55 ± 0.76 -19.66 -38.06 25.650 226

HD 10909 026.67353205 -24.01397533 8.099 ± 0.013 0.100 ± 0.036 7.41 ± 0.87 151.45 96.25 8.760 210

HD 11288 027.58461085 -23.77186757 8.467 ± 0.014 0.100 ± 0.036 5.52 ± 1.23 57.78 -15.66 9.400 225

HD 11970 029.60127276 +40.91366703 8.233 ± 0.014 0.125 ± 0.043 7.71 ± 0.96 111.26 -9.28 -14.377 260

HD 12137 030.08946630 +44.10270698 7.668 ± 0.012 0.131 ± 0.045 7.29 ± 0.73 33.63 -14.64 -12.799 223

HD 12164 029.94415781 +15.95788312 8.036 ± 0.013 0.142 ± 0.142 7.48 ± 0.88 -28.83 -18.70 -18.252 253

HD 13167 032.05742471 -24.69540754 8.325 ± 0.016 0.100 ± 0.036 8.55 ± 1.21 43.00 -37.02 15.780 228

HD 14787 035.80855513 +10.83674593 7.646 ± 0.013 0.093 ± 0.069 8.19 ± 1.11 -12.11 11.90 -8.220 218

HD 15336 036.93718826 -11.97902798 8.930 ± 0.021 0.100 ± 0.036 5.06 ± 1.43 -9.73 -13.59 -30.453 241

HD 15391 037.07944711 -11.71634666 8.628 ± 0.020 0.100 ± 0.036 3.69 ± 0.97 -3.97 20.23 28.682 222

HD 15928 038.31417251 -14.36275033 7.815 ± 0.014 0.100 ± 0.036 9.88 ± 0.82 -40.19 32.42 11.064 247

HD 16175 039.25796235 +42.06263206 7.291 ± 0.011 0.051 ± 0.031 17.28 ± 0.67 -38.90 -40.37 21.949 231

HD 16178 039.04983969 +15.14870116 8.410 ± 0.015 0.396 ± 0.396 4.38 ± 0.74 -1.98 -40.02 -24.585 209

HD 16984 040.95084647 +12.02971930 8.227 ± 0.019 0.067 ± 0.016 7.58 ± 0.89 55.72 3.11 69.677 223

HD 17311 041.63264789 -08.02807911 8.212 ± 0.014 0.177 ± 0.018 6.78 ± 0.70 -51.26 -17.81 18.516 222

HD 17620 042.23242819 -24.60979917 8.202 ± 0.012 0.100 ± 0.038 4.85 ± 0.91 -6.73 -2.11 1.340 233

HD 18015 043.36336189 -08.84802119 7.913 ± 0.013 0.148 ± 0.015 8.34 ± 0.79 63.70 -4.73 19.008 232

HD 18645 044.97154200 -00.67971900 7.862 ± 0.015 0.090 ± 0.066 8.75 ± 0.83 -6.99 -24.77 -2.656 226

HD 18667 045.03415287 +00.23542665 8.311 ± 0.020 0.095 ± 0.071 7.93 ± 1.53 45.66 -6.50 3.660 207

HD 18742 045.04440167 -20.80260631 7.822 ± 0.013 0.100 ± 0.036 7.39 ± 0.78 -19.81 -23.37 -13.831 223

HD 19522 047.00532690 -12.04132568 8.122 ± 0.013 0.153 ± 0.015 8.06 ± 1.00 140.42 45.41 57.359 228

HD 19659 047.17702968 -35.43289844 7.114 ± 0.011 0.154 ± 0.012 10.47 ± 0.52 -27.22 -112.76 1.974 262

HD 21340 051.40204264 -27.27248989 7.397 ± 0.011 0.160 ± 0.013 7.39 ± 0.68 68.17 -0.15 21.900 241

HD 21449 052.23845417 +40.18646846 7.327 ± 0.012 0.252 ± 0.008 6.15 ± 0.72 29.18 1.00 -5.328 215

HD 21581 052.22702500 -00.41753100 8.718 ± 0.015 0.271 ± 0.065 4.03 ± 1.00 67.09 -78.56 152.943 259

HD 22233 053.58382361 -14.71044808 7.937 ± 0.014 0.195 ± 0.020 6.01 ± 1.00 3.28 -1.80 19.434 227

HD 22657 054.58527200 -11.20146171 7.830 ± 0.014 0.152 ± 0.015 8.09 ± 0.87 40.54 30.44 65.610 203

Table 1 continued on next page 48 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 1 (continued)

Star α δ V AV π µα µδ RV S/N

(J2000.0) (J2000.0) (mas) (mas yr−1) (mas yr−1) (km s−1)

HD 22682 054.82105522 +13.89149080 6.677 ± 0.012 0.015 ± 0.004 13.89 ± 0.57 12.66 -100.91 -25.500 246

HD 22844 055.72831810 +56.40515710 8.125 ± 0.014 0.306 ± 0.070 9.81 ± 0.72 58.13 -20.70 -26.972 217

HD 23134 055.50814950 -21.23725321 8.318 ± 0.014 0.160 ± 0.013 6.00 ± 1.14 -19.55 -20.54 18.831 200

HD 23825 057.09140366 +10.79306356 7.929 ± 0.014 0.043 ± 0.010 9.18 ± 0.81 -21.68 -117.36 -16.793 222

HD 24148 057.54322170 -16.77526339 8.140 ± 0.015 0.208 ± 0.021 5.57 ± 0.91 46.66 0.90 49.483 223

HD 24316 057.88586416 -17.16648839 7.712 ± 0.014 0.207 ± 0.021 5.58 ± 0.78 -66.35 -65.08 52.272 205

HD 24365 058.40726726 +28.14811281 7.879 ± 0.013 0.174 ± 0.073 10.07 ± 0.97 99.01 -11.31 19.276 229

HD 25622 060.81571891 -21.41743214 7.626 ± 0.013 0.160 ± 0.013 6.54 ± 0.93 4.87 26.77 -1.817 216

HD 25975 062.06411652 +37.72749471 6.071 ± 0.011 0.292 ± 0.146 22.68 ± 0.34 -100.02 -196.30 -44.350 224

HD 26007 061.54759581 -23.27981685 8.397 ± 0.012 0.160 ± 0.013 4.78 ± 0.90 25.36 19.73 9.167 224

HD 26634 063.04665317 -13.63717234 7.998 ± 0.014 0.242 ± 0.022 6.13 ± 0.76 63.88 -14.55 8.476 216

HD 27297 064.68402808 +03.14904452 8.247 ± 0.019 0.069 ± 0.017 7.47 ± 1.30 63.18 -33.34 42.493 218

HD 27956 066.04206235 -16.04184962 8.080 ± 0.013 0.242 ± 0.022 6.90 ± 0.90 -14.97 -58.75 45.984 227

HD 28678 067.85606392 +04.57529762 8.447 ± 0.020 0.391 ± 0.164 4.41 ± 0.93 4.03 -8.82 61.465 225

HD 28737 067.93599227 -01.35259495 8.241 ± 0.017 0.122 ± 0.029 5.80 ± 1.11 14.85 -25.03 -5.702 196

HD 30090 071.61217190 +42.34856041 6.541 ± 0.011 0.141 ± 0.052 14.91 ± 0.61 -3.68 70.45 23.377 303

HD 30128 071.01308253 -21.10693387 8.266 ± 0.014 0.242 ± 0.022 4.12 ± 0.92 25.98 0.72 20.863 201

HD 30166 072.16017092 +58.38973250 7.673 ± 0.011 0.341 ± 0.130 7.27 ± 0.62 -8.77 -54.66 -32.300 205

HD 30856 072.57442501 -24.36884155 7.918 ± 0.011 0.230 ± 0.021 8.47 ± 0.71 18.91 -18.93 35.457 230

HD 30882 073.45986898 +47.95627712 8.353 ± 0.014 0.515 ± 0.206 6.43 ± 0.87 51.07 -41.90 -39.511 220

HD 31018 073.34185318 +24.17736470 7.633 ± 0.013 0.563 ± 0.281 11.38 ± 0.97 12.61 -22.73 -4.147 291

HD 31451 074.46083941 +39.63237281 8.078 ± 0.016 0.268 ± 0.099 7.69 ± 0.87 -5.94 -17.92 0.644 251

HD 31543 074.10330715 -07.02319711 8.163 ± 0.015 0.162 ± 0.073 5.57 ± 1.05 6.88 -47.31 -6.940 229

HD 31693 074.45159576 -04.65495354 7.675 ± 0.013 0.138 ± 0.062 6.80 ± 0.95 17.44 -20.85 29.318 180

HD 33142 076.89808933 -13.98647842 7.963 ± 0.013 0.121 ± 0.054 7.94 ± 0.72 -7.49 35.37 33.525 210

HD 33240 076.91066506 -28.97745375 8.234 ± 0.013 0.242 ± 0.022 6.43 ± 1.03 1.98 -9.92 10.465 209

HD 33298 077.75964660 +39.28205809 8.288 ± 0.015 0.253 ± 0.094 8.18 ± 3.13 23.92 20.17 -6.983 270

HD 33844 078.15042069 -14.95111346 7.293 ± 0.011 0.099 ± 0.045 9.91 ± 0.64 33.84 29.99 36.307 162

HD 34538 079.41767383 -13.51982741 5.495 ± 0.010 0.051 ± 0.023 20.40 ± 0.39 -7.63 -49.16 75.300 251

Table 1 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 49 Table 1 (continued)

Star α δ V AV π µα µδ RV S/N

(J2000.0) (J2000.0) (mas) (mas yr−1) (mas yr−1) (km s−1)

HD 34909 080.15615519 -05.82264099 8.002 ± 0.014 0.126 ± 0.057 7.53 ± 1.13 -7.78 -29.24 -0.426 219

HD 37445 084.52265654 -14.75615341 8.323 ± 0.014 0.192 ± 0.087 4.46 ± 1.03 -19.24 5.59 38.804 212

HD 37601 085.75697376 +56.58152362 6.052 ± 0.011 0.148 ± 0.056 16.90 ± 0.38 15.29 29.20 -31.690 229

HD 38505 086.68560645 +11.05041615 7.634 ± 0.013 0.084 ± 0.003 8.94 ± 1.16 57.41 -57.77 75.613 182

HD 39142 087.65994927 +01.69967404 7.950 ± 0.014 0.192 ± 0.033 4.69 ± 1.00 -6.74 1.85 8.977 205

HD 39731 088.64927517 +05.35368987 8.265 ± 0.015 0.122 ± 0.021 7.24 ± 1.65 -9.47 -8.65 32.695 216

HD 39828 088.91266366 +13.00188362 7.698 ± 0.013 0.095 ± 0.004 7.85 ± 1.29 29.30 -4.69 28.802 195

HD 40537 089.64767208 -21.54389390 7.314 ± 0.011 0.078 ± 0.005 12.97 ± 0.66 103.76 40.49 53.783 241

HD 45210 096.72929876 +17.45157707 7.721 ± 0.014 0.137 ± 0.066 7.63 ± 0.81 -52.33 -2.67 53.781 269

HD 45410 097.69628320 +58.16263358 5.862 ± 0.011 0.030 ± 0.012 17.92 ± 0.47 -30.14 -338.67 39.477 259

HD 45506 097.11688662 +16.23838604 6.241 ± 0.011 0.072 ± 0.035 14.51 ± 0.47 -92.18 -48.73 40.900 235

HD 47562 099.56743229 -22.76755707 8.254 ± 0.011 0.077 ± 0.020 4.77 ± 0.73 0.41 -18.91 17.309 271

HD 48122 100.56665962 +12.00793095 8.003 ± 0.018 0.188 ± 0.107 6.25 ± 0.74 50.10 11.37 2.698 272

HD 50275 103.35922801 +21.71822350 8.291 ± 0.015 0.150 ± 0.043 6.21 ± 1.01 -19.14 -32.53 84.308 190

HD 51272 104.59510314 +37.98798053 7.794 ± 0.014 0.083 ± 0.034 5.73 ± 0.77 -42.72 -27.01 13.400 213

HD 64413 118.46576774 +00.33145681 8.247 ± 0.019 0.061 ± 0.010 4.35 ± 1.27 8.45 -20.02 15.856 243

HD 64730 118.93927791 +13.33187742 7.981 ± 0.016 0.011 ± 0.000 5.79 ± 0.96 -14.74 -48.21 15.976 236

HD 72003 128.27220420 +55.35475652 7.670 ± 0.012 0.066 ± 0.066 7.20 ± 1.25 -23.57 -61.87 -6.950 221

HD 72440 128.75450407 +50.47200396 8.293 ± 0.014 0.066 ± 0.066 6.49 ± 1.10 -7.72 -9.95 -33.261 268

HD 72490 128.40271687 +13.55078801 7.836 ± 0.014 0.000 ± 0.000 7.63 ± 0.92 25.04 -16.18 31.512 254

HD 74390 131.33920039 +42.40384013 8.199 ± 0.014 0.066 ± 0.066 6.08 ± 0.86 18.02 -65.79 -58.086 203

HD 76445 134.19162325 +17.48135033 7.647 ± 0.013 0.000 ± 0.000 11.22 ± 0.70 32.18 -20.33 -16.402 233

HD 77172 135.71582235 +52.28582611 8.086 ± 0.014 0.066 ± 0.066 7.59 ± 1.01 -75.85 -138.08 -15.808 211

HD 77818 136.85891294 +58.87505348 7.635 ± 0.012 0.000 ± 0.000 7.98 ± 0.70 17.63 -90.52 -44.051 212

HD 80811 140.55399843 +12.54910041 8.357 ± 0.016 0.006 ± 0.005 8.47 ± 1.15 -124.85 -195.01 30.014 204

HD 82074 142.38506562 -04.24663549 6.265 ± 0.011 0.031 ± 0.022 17.97 ± 0.50 -31.03 -52.33 -12.800 253

HD 82886 143.93826142 +34.78074254 7.633 ± 0.012 0.125 ± 0.124 7.97 ± 0.74 14.33 -34.78 12.554 229

HD 83024 143.91858782 +02.63742541 7.911 ± 0.014 0.031 ± 0.022 8.21 ± 0.61 -84.14 10.63 4.556 186

HD 83394 144.99621282 +53.49696317 7.448 ± 0.011 0.001 ± 0.000 9.35 ± 0.66 -9.53 -131.53 40.345 250

Table 1 continued on next page 50 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 1 (continued)

Star α δ V AV π µα µδ RV S/N

(J2000.0) (J2000.0) (mas) (mas yr−1) (mas yr−1) (km s−1)

HD 83752 145.13246924 -01.73009336 7.554 ± 0.012 0.031 ± 0.022 8.64 ± 0.53 -45.53 -27.39 31.200 165

HD 85440 148.11955363 +27.77405677 7.821 ± 0.012 0.067 ± 0.009 8.86 ± 0.84 1.36 -14.80 -4.184 256

HD 85472 148.49148324 +57.68370349 7.459 ± 0.011 0.001 ± 0.000 13.72 ± 0.70 36.85 -93.52 -9.954 267

HD 87230 150.80226430 -20.93086250 7.794 ± 0.014 0.145 ± 0.009 8.14 ± 0.64 -61.00 -24.39 42.625 232

HD 87669 151.65651379 +06.90554668 8.195 ± 0.014 0.019 ± 0.002 6.43 ± 0.90 92.55 -72.35 8.257 198

HD 88134 152.53131437 +16.51662479 8.316 ± 0.015 0.112 ± 0.016 6.63 ± 0.78 23.90 -45.13 21.617 212

HD 88654 153.31844818 -08.44555205 7.688 ± 0.012 0.112 ± 0.011 10.63 ± 0.76 22.99 -30.30 -6.933 226

HD 89391 154.60461607 -26.50034192 7.946 ± 0.013 0.156 ± 0.056 9.31 ± 0.81 37.99 -41.36 29.603 226

HD 90043 155.86820800 -00.90224700 6.448 ± 0.011 0.031 ± 0.022 12.91 ± 0.38 66.21 -34.92 7.088 207

HD 90792 157.19297727 -14.46565080 8.179 ± 0.014 0.156 ± 0.016 5.54 ± 0.78 -33.28 -7.73 32.556 220

HD 93396 161.70725271 -09.39902416 8.045 ± 0.014 0.119 ± 0.012 9.76 ± 0.85 -78.30 -77.61 34.959 226

HD 93461 161.83994926 -01.72491378 8.271 ± 0.015 0.019 ± 0.002 7.62 ± 0.96 5.95 -18.66 13.093 245

HD 93864 162.49379759 -07.48241297 8.010 ± 0.013 0.123 ± 0.012 9.20 ± 0.75 -155.71 -38.17 15.935 236

HD 94834 164.31297046 +24.14278282 7.616 ± 0.013 0.048 ± 0.046 10.88 ± 0.64 -73.37 36.90 2.813 195

HD 95089 164.69890121 +01.72921549 7.953 ± 0.014 0.019 ± 0.002 7.19 ± 0.83 -35.31 -47.27 8.081 231

HD 95526 165.53574128 +43.72111110 8.328 ± 0.015 0.082 ± 0.059 6.73 ± 0.97 -122.11 -102.40 22.059 214

HD 96063 166.18522764 -02.51321852 8.261 ± 0.018 0.019 ± 0.002 6.33 ± 0.82 27.69 -17.60 -1.373 246

HD 96683 166.99633928 -23.85846670 8.211 ± 0.012 0.152 ± 0.015 6.11 ± 0.86 -32.03 -1.92 17.922 199

HD 97601 168.63913911 +52.94690305 7.454 ± 0.011 0.001 ± 0.000 8.90 ± 0.75 32.88 -29.95 -62.000 231

HD 98219 169.44813718 -23.97541613 8.040 ± 0.012 0.139 ± 0.014 7.45 ± 0.67 -131.02 -16.91 -10.458 220

HD 99706 172.12589042 +43.96658060 7.644 ± 0.013 0.082 ± 0.059 7.76 ± 0.68 45.57 -86.89 -30.256 210

HD 100337 173.26720547 +39.32167273 7.937 ± 0.013 0.082 ± 0.059 6.40 ± 0.76 38.42 -1.58 -30.480 217

HD 102329 176.69435490 +03.47429342 7.893 ± 0.015 0.065 ± 0.023 6.33 ± 0.83 -45.38 -18.46 14.580 197

HD 102444 176.88109122 -05.26361962 7.960 ± 0.012 0.019 ± 0.002 9.19 ± 0.90 -26.41 -38.70 23.056 243

HD 102956 177.84380061 +57.64073508 7.858 ± 0.011 0.001 ± 0.000 7.92 ± 0.83 -10.82 -17.14 -26.025 205

HD 103616 178.96409204 -21.65943614 7.681 ± 0.013 0.201 ± 0.010 9.72 ± 0.77 -34.55 -133.19 8.000 226

HD 104017 179.68829140 +37.87721968 7.843 ± 0.012 0.080 ± 0.057 9.16 ± 0.87 -4.92 26.10 -4.577 156

HD 106270 183.40535538 -09.51338029 7.586 ± 0.012 0.019 ± 0.002 11.78 ± 0.79 -99.69 -41.86 24.331 244

HD 106279 183.39435584 +30.56245543 8.366 ± 0.014 0.054 ± 0.027 4.68 ± 0.84 1.42 -17.58 -45.801 228

Table 1 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 51 Table 1 (continued)

Star α δ V AV π µα µδ RV S/N

(J2000.0) (J2000.0) (mas) (mas yr−1) (mas yr−1) (km s−1)

HD 107990 186.13579644 +04.33117025 7.955 ± 0.013 0.099 ± 0.039 3.54 ± 0.85 30.37 -22.81 -6.554 230

HD 108189 186.41909600 -00.28217500 7.729 ± 0.013 0.099 ± 0.039 6.46 ± 0.66 -81.65 26.97 -3.686 247

HD 108863 187.58296070 +21.94824495 7.746 ± 0.013 0.059 ± 0.021 7.18 ± 0.78 -73.83 -33.29 -27.984 202

HD 109159 188.17178904 -17.22067971 7.975 ± 0.013 0.174 ± 0.009 9.86 ± 0.66 -110.26 13.97 9.348 242

HD 109218 188.28502907 +01.04399524 8.109 ± 0.016 0.037 ± 0.014 10.52 ± 0.67 -98.57 -52.35 18.423 239

HD 109929 189.60618423 +14.87241216 7.654 ± 0.013 0.013 ± 0.005 12.84 ± 0.56 -38.91 -7.44 -10.706 275

HD 112115 193.48092215 +24.63589363 8.143 ± 0.014 0.094 ± 0.009 3.08 ± 0.80 -37.87 -14.53 3.973 142

HD 112973 195.03118430 +34.91935057 7.626 ± 0.012 0.024 ± 0.003 8.44 ± 0.74 -77.00 1.51 -34.986 219

HD 112988 195.04286438 +34.99841754 7.772 ± 0.012 0.032 ± 0.004 7.80 ± 0.75 -78.70 1.88 -32.842 228

HD 114161 197.24014828 -13.44118482 8.047 ± 0.015 0.174 ± 0.009 5.49 ± 0.82 -37.20 -5.96 -7.180 192

HD 114659 197.95297265 +12.73043994 8.306 ± 0.016 0.094 ± 0.009 4.84 ± 0.95 -5.20 -7.89 -1.322 179

HD 116029 200.16476095 +24.64869668 7.878 ± 0.011 0.081 ± 0.081 8.12 ± 0.65 -13.30 -52.49 -6.923 172

HD 117623 202.47027856 +64.18050702 7.046 ± 0.011 0.001 ± 0.000 4.95 ± 0.53 -42.67 -6.00 -6.631 240

HD 117762 203.07305100 +06.35363375 7.920 ± 0.013 0.079 ± 0.008 6.81 ± 0.69 -40.76 80.45 -26.104 256

HD 118082 203.67496352 -09.10676347 8.038 ± 0.014 0.174 ± 0.009 6.94 ± 0.72 8.91 -6.93 -26.805 207

HD 118744 204.68050952 +09.98081992 7.859 ± 0.013 0.034 ± 0.005 5.52 ± 0.72 7.03 1.11 -0.025 203

HD 120531 207.37374736 +30.72079905 7.967 ± 0.012 0.100 ± 0.073 7.81 ± 0.64 -19.33 15.17 24.663 247

HD 122253 209.92300367 +42.04980641 7.801 ± 0.012 0.087 ± 0.087 9.88 ± 0.56 5.55 28.67 -9.990 241

HD 123239 211.68781193 -14.09526636 8.407 ± 0.017 0.339 ± 0.034 5.15 ± 0.83 8.23 25.08 41.990 227

HD 124641 213.44852868 +41.18759190 8.049 ± 0.012 0.100 ± 0.100 5.92 ± 0.76 -8.13 4.63 11.842 201

HD 125217 214.60943928 -19.56242033 8.314 ± 0.015 0.312 ± 0.031 6.13 ± 0.93 -18.93 -18.78 -6.304 193

HD 125390 214.53883030 +38.96697805 8.213 ± 0.012 0.100 ± 0.100 5.15 ± 0.82 -13.22 -16.17 -76.758 225

HD 125607 214.86337106 +37.60996555 8.100 ± 0.012 0.100 ± 0.100 7.52 ± 0.87 -47.62 -33.70 -39.000 222

HD 126991 217.06688240 +24.51754394 7.938 ± 0.013 0.100 ± 0.073 9.91 ± 0.71 -231.51 121.48 -94.578 239

HD 127374 217.82732826 -11.87017594 8.397 ± 0.015 0.297 ± 0.030 6.69 ± 0.92 -30.91 -14.22 -35.966 226

HD 128095 218.57238375 +28.48599918 8.139 ± 0.012 0.100 ± 0.073 8.37 ± 0.83 49.09 -107.70 28.952 215

HD 128720 219.52401938 +12.80361485 8.317 ± 0.019 0.087 ± 0.087 7.56 ± 1.28 17.22 -70.33 16.832 199

HD 131496 223.34595295 +18.23540451 7.806 ± 0.012 0.073 ± 0.073 9.09 ± 0.78 44.46 -35.08 1.146 196

HD 136418 229.77575899 +41.73320606 7.886 ± 0.012 0.129 ± 0.004 10.18 ± 0.58 -19.66 -181.92 -34.407 208

Table 1 continued on next page 52 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 1 (continued)

Star α δ V AV π µα µδ RV S/N

(J2000.0) (J2000.0) (mas) (mas yr−1) (mas yr−1) (km s−1)

HD 136513 230.21645277 +07.68271400 8.252 ± 0.014 0.053 ± 0.002 5.88 ± 0.85 -47.81 -13.38 -59.606 222

HD 140025 234.93843043 +44.31118878 8.231 ± 0.013 0.132 ± 0.004 8.61 ± 0.57 1.56 -60.42 30.158 223

HD 141712 237.05581068 +50.95455308 8.378 ± 0.014 0.132 ± 0.004 5.61 ± 0.66 -16.45 -24.21 -23.235 228

HD 142091 237.80804694 +35.65737975 4.803 ± 0.010 0.034 ± 0.001 32.79 ± 0.21 -8.55 -348.44 -25.107 194

HD 142245 238.23450511 +15.43070731 7.458 ± 0.013 0.053 ± 0.002 9.13 ± 0.62 -55.58 -20.82 6.708 168

HD 144363 241.43641272 -07.08485533 8.248 ± 0.013 0.286 ± 0.220 7.07 ± 0.99 2.35 21.79 6.500 221

HD 145428 242.96355647 -25.88357239 7.754 ± 0.012 0.568 ± 0.210 7.62 ± 0.81 -128.94 -58.98 -1.100 235

HD 146278 243.46435843 +40.34880889 7.987 ± 0.013 0.132 ± 0.004 6.06 ± 0.57 -25.59 -99.56 11.352 199

HD 150331 250.43939338 -33.14576125 5.846 ± 0.011 0.276 ± 0.105 11.51 ± 0.42 -58.47 -57.57 -6.637 284

HD 152581 253.43159405 +11.97374506 8.354 ± 0.013 0.069 ± 0.069 5.39 ± 0.96 11.49 -15.79 3.739 246

HD 152733 253.23839725 +44.40240031 8.105 ± 0.014 0.102 ± 0.028 6.92 ± 0.49 -9.53 69.38 -27.517 191

HD 155413 257.99431423 -14.62037900 7.267 ± 0.012 0.225 ± 0.092 12.30 ± 0.69 -16.13 -39.92 -23.274 281

HD 158038 261.43928820 +27.30334069 7.471 ± 0.011 0.115 ± 0.006 9.65 ± 0.74 48.35 -59.04 19.632 139

HD 158449 262.28977625 +06.14846658 8.035 ± 0.013 0.527 ± 0.153 6.31 ± 0.81 -19.52 23.16 -26.926 215

HD 160215 264.13206977 +44.72336309 8.160 ± 0.013 0.101 ± 0.028 9.08 ± 0.60 -55.37 56.25 -59.230 201

HD 163528 268.50302932 +49.79514098 8.353 ± 0.015 0.102 ± 0.004 5.34 ± 0.57 -0.19 30.06 -65.155 203

HD 166494 271.87260166 +56.80190136 7.686 ± 0.012 0.028 ± 0.009 8.72 ± 0.45 22.36 64.09 -30.304 220

HD 167042 272.63183367 +54.28655340 5.977 ± 0.010 0.012 ± 0.004 19.91 ± 0.26 107.94 247.35 -18.181 235

HD 171264 278.41951987 +04.59237354 8.106 ± 0.013 0.397 ± 0.167 8.34 ± 0.75 19.27 -3.97 11.300 246

HD 175541 283.92035082 +04.26532615 8.013 ± 0.014 0.321 ± 0.096 7.87 ± 0.95 -6.82 -89.23 19.674 282

HD 178251 287.23442012 -28.74104258 8.001 ± 0.013 0.316 ± 0.101 6.67 ± 0.96 46.27 -80.26 91.769 259

HD 180053 288.40089062 +34.91454362 7.942 ± 0.013 0.116 ± 0.002 7.92 ± 0.54 -9.65 29.34 -5.874 207

HD 180902 289.82378283 -23.55815627 7.786 ± 0.014 0.252 ± 0.081 9.13 ± 0.86 33.18 -20.50 -4.651 218

HD 181342 290.26762895 -23.61957022 7.557 ± 0.013 0.254 ± 0.081 9.04 ± 0.61 -45.87 -30.58 -0.837 194

HD 183473 291.98849995 +42.77663779 7.887 ± 0.012 0.050 ± 0.047 9.14 ± 0.51 71.49 155.17 -46.421 239

HD 185269 294.29892048 +28.49986264 6.679 ± 0.011 0.088 ± 0.033 19.89 ± 0.56 -32.03 -81.18 0.620 233

HD 185351 294.15823711 +44.69493494 5.176 ± 0.010 0.019 ± 0.018 24.49 ± 0.22 -94.81 -104.25 -5.900 250

HD 185351 294.15823711 +44.69493494 5.176 ± 0.010 0.019 ± 0.018 24.49 ± 0.22 -94.81 -104.25 -5.900 243

HD 185351 294.15823711 +44.69493494 5.176 ± 0.010 0.019 ± 0.018 24.49 ± 0.22 -94.81 -104.25 -5.900 236

Table 1 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 53 Table 1 (continued)

Star α δ V AV π µα µδ RV S/N

(J2000.0) (J2000.0) (mas) (mas yr−1) (mas yr−1) (km s−1)

HD 187460 297.26244145 +29.88285283 8.350 ± 0.013 0.303 ± 0.112 5.66 ± 0.90 -3.62 -1.13 -6.100 161

HD 188386 298.69910343 +05.70285399 8.180 ± 0.012 0.238 ± 0.057 6.97 ± 1.04 14.84 3.86 -73.744 231

HD 192153 303.49872720 -17.67615463 8.286 ± 0.016 0.327 ± 0.150 9.03 ± 0.94 105.82 -9.15 -37.994 244

HD 192699 304.02502117 +04.58079271 6.454 ± 0.011 0.040 ± 0.009 15.24 ± 0.57 -39.24 -52.15 13.050 259

HD 193342 304.25226885 +56.90458900 8.086 ± 0.013 0.683 ± 0.355 5.69 ± 0.46 -36.19 -54.81 -24.246 213

HD 193391 304.90545561 +13.01077579 8.232 ± 0.015 0.091 ± 0.002 7.59 ± 1.15 10.75 -12.86 -41.912 196

HD 194541 306.26683336 +32.46851434 7.514 ± 0.011 0.250 ± 0.090 8.65 ± 0.57 30.38 -6.64 -20.453 191

HD 195787 307.64394878 +58.28723746 7.630 ± 0.012 0.484 ± 0.252 8.36 ± 0.77 -29.14 -112.57 -10.278 235

HD 195824 308.40476843 +01.26925199 8.048 ± 0.014 0.072 ± 0.016 8.47 ± 1.03 33.24 1.88 7.740 236

HD 196645 309.58717207 +13.33140947 7.805 ± 0.014 0.058 ± 0.013 10.61 ± 0.77 117.79 90.93 -33.297 251

HD 197162 310.15383860 +37.39745221 8.019 ± 0.012 0.335 ± 0.120 6.40 ± 0.60 85.80 -2.42 -139.688 233

HD 198599 312.94706285 -10.31726086 7.492 ± 0.012 0.149 ± 0.024 2.09 ± 0.89 0.53 -1.85 20.713 220

HD 200081 315.34339842 -02.51400509 7.966 ± 0.013 0.159 ± 0.035 3.93 ± 0.65 0.82 -11.03 7.670 224

HD 200491 315.73292717 +28.98485993 7.735 ± 0.012 0.186 ± 0.084 6.46 ± 0.75 7.05 -6.96 -7.484 188

HD 200964 316.66600997 +03.80311890 6.494 ± 0.011 0.044 ± 0.010 13.85 ± 0.52 94.99 50.47 -71.884 212

HD 202696 319.22480389 +27.25812220 8.225 ± 0.014 0.082 ± 0.018 7.52 ± 0.99 45.98 36.04 -34.433 200

HD 202867 319.68879093 -02.13688563 8.129 ± 0.016 0.128 ± 0.021 8.06 ± 0.96 -21.57 -18.81 14.212 235

HD 203471 320.39329902 +28.56467913 8.347 ± 0.015 0.184 ± 0.083 6.52 ± 0.96 -39.31 -69.50 23.620 222

HD 205163 323.41424732 -06.37384661 8.218 ± 0.016 0.149 ± 0.024 4.35 ± 1.05 -7.88 -25.04 50.098 197

HD 206610 325.85375016 -07.40825239 8.352 ± 0.015 0.149 ± 0.024 5.16 ± 0.95 2.35 2.34 -18.658 158

HD 206635 325.85558305 +01.80091007 8.306 ± 0.015 0.126 ± 0.020 8.34 ± 0.79 147.42 -27.12 -40.357 225

HD 207077 326.68352806 -08.00718390 8.278 ± 0.015 0.135 ± 0.022 7.33 ± 0.93 18.56 -40.75 -20.370 220

HD 208585 329.22168900 +17.43978357 8.004 ± 0.013 0.089 ± 0.020 6.88 ± 0.92 -15.04 -2.33 -26.979 223

HD 210011 331.30785945 +63.57841729 6.944 ± 0.011 0.459 ± 0.124 5.23 ± 0.48 22.81 1.31 -10.319 235

HD 210521 332.84335013 -22.20867611 8.113 ± 0.014 0.171 ± 0.010 6.07 ± 0.69 -7.44 -3.91 -13.818 252

HD 210702 332.96387858 +16.04055286 5.937 ± 0.010 0.046 ± 0.033 18.20 ± 0.39 -3.15 -18.02 16.340 231

HD 212771 336.76279598 -17.26365469 7.603 ± 0.015 0.161 ± 0.010 7.63 ± 0.80 -87.59 -103.17 14.863 246

HD 213278 337.61609827 -04.81656969 8.081 ± 0.013 0.070 ± 0.018 7.44 ± 1.04 96.87 50.88 -53.476 240

HD 215049 340.71769137 -27.88689167 8.280 ± 0.015 0.099 ± 0.013 8.90 ± 0.89 72.47 -60.74 -29.844 232

Table 1 continued on next page 54 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 1 (continued)

Star α δ V AV π µα µδ RV S/N

(J2000.0) (J2000.0) (mas) (mas yr−1) (mas yr−1) (km s−1)

HD 215549 341.39361744 +30.44255608 6.397 ± 0.011 0.034 ± 0.018 16.67 ± 0.60 -251.54 -349.76 -1.590 233

HD 215908 341.95126700 +49.17859778 8.031 ± 0.013 0.275 ± 0.096 6.26 ± 0.72 0.86 5.22 6.348 247

HD 216834 344.08517871 -06.54583717 8.133 ± 0.013 0.070 ± 0.018 6.09 ± 0.95 -1.13 -18.21 -32.615 239

HD 217496 345.28274861 -09.55391710 7.863 ± 0.012 0.070 ± 0.018 8.76 ± 1.06 -24.68 -90.42 -2.206 234

HD 217591 345.47622512 -05.96628891 7.875 ± 0.014 0.070 ± 0.018 8.04 ± 0.75 23.11 -32.88 -9.106 194

HD 217681 345.63288706 -11.26569736 7.760 ± 0.012 0.147 ± 0.009 9.21 ± 1.03 -65.92 -16.46 -0.257 191

HD 219553 349.20710502 -21.20309181 7.261 ± 0.011 0.099 ± 0.040 11.35 ± 0.93 20.90 -49.30 3.458 170

HD 220122 350.30717859 -12.82986877 8.406 ± 0.020 0.100 ± 0.015 3.76 ± 1.35 -14.59 -4.80 -46.327 227

HD 220952 351.99218978 +23.58672686 7.853 ± 0.013 0.145 ± 0.026 7.99 ± 0.52 80.12 27.95 -15.604 233

HD 221504 353.21108334 -21.68768845 8.086 ± 0.014 0.099 ± 0.040 10.49 ± 0.75 23.56 -8.99 -1.391 219

HD 222112 354.47039864 -05.97836440 8.400 ± 0.017 0.100 ± 0.015 6.07 ± 1.18 43.82 -54.34 -12.685 143

HD 223627 357.79449152 +44.54770122 8.215 ± 0.013 0.213 ± 0.128 6.29 ± 0.96 23.74 -39.09 -52.620 198

HD 224032 358.65154469 +05.05659038 8.232 ± 0.014 0.070 ± 0.018 9.12 ± 0.96 116.64 -55.58 0.000 224

HD 224679 359.95462711 -02.11260592 8.360 ± 0.014 0.099 ± 0.035 4.76 ± 0.82 79.47 -21.95 -17.394 236

HD 225021 000.66702757 +51.47240100 7.707 ± 0.011 0.146 ± 0.020 6.96 ± 0.78 42.11 -4.88 -6.225 201

HD 236427 007.47524003 +59.25486282 8.253 ± 0.012 0.305 ± 0.098 9.16 ± 0.75 -1.16 -71.28 -12.479 216

HIP 43212 132.04376862 +15.11066823 8.352 ± 0.015 0.169 ± 0.132 3.83 ± 1.18 -8.59 -3.84 2.819 211

HIP 87123 267.00448087 +32.65584898 8.359 ± 0.014 0.150 ± 0.007 7.09 ± 0.62 -27.79 20.17 -66.098 193 Retired A Stars Revisited 55

Table 2. List of Fe I and Fe II lines.

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

5023.185 26.0 4.283 -1.524 -7.135 37.9

5025.303 26.0 4.284 -1.919 -7.140 20.6

5044.211 26.0 2.851 -2.206 -7.280 72.3

5054.642 26.0 3.640 -2.087 -7.599 38.3

5058.496 26.0 3.642 -2.809 -7.599 12.1

5067.149 26.0 4.220 -1.068 -7.187 65.3

5109.651 26.0 4.301 -0.853 -7.150 74.2

5159.057 26.0 4.283 -0.932 -7.175 70.1

5196.059 26.0 4.256 -0.732 -7.510 74.8

5197.935 26.0 4.301 -1.608 -7.175 33.2

5213.806 26.0 3.943 -2.802 -7.253 7.0

5225.526 26.0 0.110 -4.845 -7.820 72.1

5228.375 26.0 4.220 -1.169 -7.233 59.0

5243.777 26.0 4.256 -1.095 -7.215 62.0

Table 2 continued on next page 56 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 2 (continued)

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

5247.050 26.0 0.087 -4.994 -7.822 66.9

5250.209 26.0 0.121 -4.959 -7.820 67.0

5253.020 26.0 2.279 -3.975 -7.570 16.6

5288.525 26.0 3.695 -1.452 -7.596 65.4

5294.547 26.0 3.640 -2.694 -7.538 15.4

5295.312 26.0 4.415 -1.595 -7.135 29.2

5322.040 26.0 2.279 -2.956 -7.600 60.7

5373.708 26.0 4.473 -0.952 -7.123 60.2

5376.830 26.0 4.295 -2.094 -7.529 14.8

5379.573 26.0 3.695 -1.555 -7.575 61.3

5386.333 26.0 4.154 -1.797 -7.172 31.4

5386.960 26.0 3.642 -2.504 -7.780 21.5

5389.478 26.0 4.415 -0.619 -7.159 83.9

5398.279 26.0 4.446 -0.788 -7.144 71.7

5401.266 26.0 4.320 -1.823 -7.219 23.5

5406.774 26.0 4.371 -1.496 -7.189 35.7

5417.033 26.0 4.415 -1.478 -7.166 34.8

Table 2 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 57 Table 2 (continued)

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

5432.948 26.0 4.446 -0.808 -7.153 70.4

5441.339 26.0 4.312 -1.683 -7.234 29.7

5464.279 26.0 4.143 -1.629 -7.770 37.7

5466.396 26.0 4.371 -0.721 -7.204 79.0

5466.987 26.0 3.573 -2.237 -7.820 35.2

5473.162 26.0 4.191 -2.072 -7.173 18.9

5491.832 26.0 4.186 -2.258 -7.700 13.3

5522.446 26.0 4.209 -1.488 -7.257 43.5

5539.280 26.0 3.642 -2.612 -7.554 18.2

5543.935 26.0 4.218 -1.237 -7.263 56.7

5546.505 26.0 4.371 -1.210 -7.224 50.7

5546.990 26.0 4.218 -1.812 -7.263 28.1

5560.211 26.0 4.435 -1.126 -7.189 52.1

5587.574 26.0 4.143 -1.684 -7.800 35.5

5618.632 26.0 4.209 -1.359 -7.264 50.4

5619.595 26.0 4.386 -1.503 -7.233 34.9

5633.946 26.0 4.991 -0.225 -7.337 73.2

Table 2 continued on next page 58 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 2 (continued)

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

5636.695 26.0 3.640 -2.570 -7.581 19.8

5638.262 26.0 4.220 -0.869 -7.269 77.6

5641.434 26.0 4.256 -1.039 -7.264 65.8

5646.684 26.0 4.261 -2.482 -7.480 7.5

5651.468 26.0 4.473 -1.819 -7.187 18.6

5652.317 26.0 4.261 -1.829 -7.251 25.6

5661.344 26.0 4.284 -1.906 -7.244 21.8

5667.518 26.0 4.178 -1.407 -7.530 47.6

5677.684 26.0 4.103 -2.676 -7.268 6.9

5679.023 26.0 4.652 -0.827 -7.099 59.5

5680.240 26.0 4.186 -2.379 -7.660 10.7

5696.088 26.0 4.549 -1.937 -7.156 13.1

5701.543 26.0 2.559 -2.243 -7.576 84.3

5705.464 26.0 4.301 -1.502 -7.260 39.0

5731.761 26.0 4.256 -1.194 -7.271 57.2

5738.227 26.0 4.220 -2.231 -7.220 13.6

5741.847 26.0 4.256 -1.690 -7.272 32.1

Table 2 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 59 Table 2 (continued)

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

5752.031 26.0 4.549 -0.913 -7.510 54.5

5760.344 26.0 3.642 -2.549 -7.549 20.7

5775.080 26.0 4.220 -1.171 -7.530 57.0

5778.453 26.0 2.588 -3.535 -7.576 22.2

5784.658 26.0 3.397 -2.634 -7.234 27.1

5793.914 26.0 4.220 -1.677 -7.278 34.5

5806.725 26.0 4.608 -0.944 -7.148 54.4

5809.217 26.0 3.884 -1.712 -7.154 50.0

5811.914 26.0 4.143 -2.398 -7.800 11.2

5814.807 26.0 4.283 -1.881 -7.272 23.0

5815.217 26.0 4.154 -2.441 -7.271 10.2

5827.877 26.0 3.283 -3.266 -7.261 10.5

5848.126 26.0 4.608 -1.158 -7.520 40.1

5849.683 26.0 3.695 -3.015 -7.567 7.7

5852.218 26.0 4.549 -1.248 -7.188 40.6

5853.148 26.0 1.485 -5.157 -7.790 8.1

5855.075 26.0 4.608 -1.595 -7.158 22.4

Table 2 continued on next page 60 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 2 (continued)

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

5856.088 26.0 4.295 -1.598 -7.532 33.8

5859.586 26.0 4.549 -0.578 -7.510 71.3

5862.356 26.0 4.549 -0.304 -7.520 86.2

5905.671 26.0 4.652 -0.841 -7.144 58.3

5916.247 26.0 2.454 -2.960 -7.601 54.9

5927.788 26.0 4.652 -1.128 -7.148 42.4

5929.677 26.0 4.549 -1.262 -7.204 40.1

5930.180 26.0 4.652 -0.386 -7.149 88.3

5934.654 26.0 3.929 -1.244 -7.153 75.8

5956.693 26.0 0.859 -4.639 -7.780 50.8

5983.680 26.0 4.549 -0.648 -7.510 68.3

5984.815 26.0 4.733 -0.262 -7.420 82.0

5987.065 26.0 4.795 -0.465 -7.420 66.8

6003.011 26.0 3.882 -1.195 -7.181 81.2

6005.541 26.0 2.588 -3.522 -7.750 23.0

6008.556 26.0 3.884 -0.918 -7.540 87.9

6012.209 26.0 2.223 -3.862 -7.649 23.9

Table 2 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 61 Table 2 (continued)

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

6034.035 26.0 4.312 -2.369 -7.279 8.8

6035.337 26.0 4.295 -2.551 -7.502 6.2

6054.073 26.0 4.371 -2.263 -7.270 9.8

6056.004 26.0 4.733 -0.558 -7.130 72.2

6078.491 26.0 4.795 -0.292 -7.410 77.0

6079.009 26.0 4.652 -1.064 -7.177 45.7

6082.710 26.0 2.223 -3.622 -7.654 34.3

6085.257 26.0 2.759 -2.908 -7.601 43.2

6093.642 26.0 4.608 -1.402 -7.202 30.8

6096.664 26.0 3.984 -1.861 -7.152 37.8

6098.243 26.0 4.559 -1.825 -7.238 16.3

6127.906 26.0 4.143 -1.503 -7.790 44.4

6136.993 26.0 2.198 -3.037 -7.691 64.1

6151.617 26.0 2.176 -3.357 -7.696 49.8

6157.727 26.0 4.076 -1.257 -7.790 58.9

6159.378 26.0 4.608 -1.910 -7.216 12.7

6165.359 26.0 4.143 -1.487 -7.780 45.3

Table 2 continued on next page 62 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 2 (continued)

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

6173.334 26.0 2.223 -2.938 -7.690 67.9

6187.989 26.0 3.943 -1.724 -7.179 47.3

6200.312 26.0 2.608 -2.457 -7.589 73.1

6213.429 26.0 2.223 -2.650 -7.691 82.4

6219.280 26.0 2.198 -2.549 -7.694 89.1

6220.779 26.0 3.882 -2.390 -7.208 19.2

6226.734 26.0 3.884 -2.143 -7.208 29.0

6232.640 26.0 3.654 -1.232 -7.540 83.7

6240.646 26.0 2.223 -3.337 -7.661 48.4

6265.132 26.0 2.176 -2.633 -7.700 85.8

6335.329 26.0 2.198 -2.423 -7.698 96.8

6380.743 26.0 4.186 -1.312 -7.790 51.8

6385.718 26.0 4.733 -1.887 -7.187 10.7

6392.537 26.0 2.279 -4.007 -7.643 17.5

6574.226 26.0 0.990 -5.019 -7.830 28.3

6591.312 26.0 4.593 -2.065 -7.697 9.8

6593.869 26.0 2.433 -2.461 -7.629 83.7

Table 2 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 63 Table 2 (continued)

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

6597.561 26.0 4.795 -0.984 -7.190 44.0

6608.025 26.0 2.279 -4.017 -7.648 17.5

6609.109 26.0 2.559 -2.708 -7.610 64.5

6625.021 26.0 1.011 -5.374 -7.830 14.9

6627.543 26.0 4.549 -1.542 -7.250 27.8

6646.930 26.0 2.608 -3.988 -7.604 9.9

6653.851 26.0 4.154 -2.475 -7.153 10.2

6699.141 26.0 4.593 -2.167 -7.667 8.0

6703.565 26.0 2.759 -3.078 -7.633 36.6

6710.318 26.0 1.485 -4.876 -7.733 15.6

6713.742 26.0 4.795 -1.485 -7.207 20.9

6725.355 26.0 4.103 -2.257 -7.181 17.3

6726.666 26.0 4.607 -1.062 -7.500 46.9

6732.064 26.0 4.584 -2.208 -7.700 7.5

6733.150 26.0 4.638 -1.490 -7.247 26.5

6739.520 26.0 1.557 -4.955 -7.726 11.7

6745.100 26.0 4.580 -2.164 -7.726 8.3

Table 2 continued on next page 64 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 2 (continued)

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

6745.955 26.0 4.076 -2.709 -7.820 7.3

6750.151 26.0 2.424 -2.672 -7.609 73.6

6752.707 26.0 4.638 -1.285 -7.249 36.1

6806.842 26.0 2.728 -3.153 -7.643 34.7

6839.830 26.0 2.559 -3.433 -7.617 29.7

6842.685 26.0 4.638 -1.245 -7.189 38.5

6857.249 26.0 4.076 -2.125 -7.820 22.2

6861.937 26.0 2.424 -3.852 -7.637 18.7

5100.655 26.1 2.807 -4.212 -7.892 20.4

5132.661 26.1 2.807 -4.088 -7.894 24.8

5197.568 26.1 3.231 -2.497 -7.880 80.0

5234.623 26.1 3.221 -2.357 -7.880 82.8

5264.802 26.1 3.231 -3.185 -7.875 45.5

5284.103 26.1 2.891 -3.237 -7.887 57.3

5325.552 26.1 3.221 -3.246 -7.883 43.1

5414.070 26.1 3.221 -3.647 -7.878 27.0

5425.248 26.1 3.200 -3.304 -7.886 41.7

Table 2 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 65 Table 2 (continued)

a b λ Ion χ log gf log Γw EW⊙

−1 (A)˚ (eV) (4πsNH ) (mA)˚

5534.838 26.1 3.245 -2.986 -7.883 57.9

5991.371 26.1 3.153 -3.609 -7.895 31.3

6084.102 26.1 3.199 -3.840 -7.892 21.3

6113.319 26.1 3.221 -4.155 -7.893 11.9

6149.246 26.1 3.889 -2.789 -7.870 36.4

6238.386 26.1 3.889 -2.634 -7.870 43.0

6247.557 26.1 3.892 -2.427 -7.870 52.1

6369.459 26.1 2.891 -4.203 -7.899 19.0

6416.919 26.1 3.892 -2.754 -7.873 39.8 aFe I and Fe II ions are represented by the notations 26.0 and 26.1, following the format used by MOOG. b log Γw is the logarithm of the van der Waals damping constant. 66 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

Table 3. Atmospheric Parameters.

Star Teﬀ log g [Fe/H] ξ σ N σ N

(K) (km s−1) (Fe I) (Fe II) (Fe I) (Fe II)

HD 1100 4808 ± 29 2.89 ± 0.17 -0.06 ± 0.02 1.165 ± 0.030 0.05 133 0.11 17

HD 1293 5160 ± 21 3.27 ± 0.06 -0.44 ± 0.01 0.990 ± 0.030 0.04 133 0.06 14

HD 1384 4875 ± 50 3.39 ± 0.18 0.31 ± 0.02 1.093 ± 0.060 0.10 136 0.10 11

HD 1502 4988 ± 22 3.21 ± 0.07 -0.00 ± 0.01 1.123 ± 0.030 0.05 137 0.05 15

HD 2946 5488 ± 15 3.64 ± 0.06 -0.23 ± 0.01 1.171 ± 0.020 0.03 138 0.06 15

HD 3458 5168 ± 25 2.90 ± 0.09 -0.04 ± 0.02 1.420 ± 0.030 0.05 140 0.06 14

HD 4313 4943 ± 29 3.26 ± 0.06 0.09 ± 0.02 1.104 ± 0.030 0.06 139 0.06 14

HD 4395 5610 ± 18 3.75 ± 0.07 -0.15 ± 0.01 1.218 ± 0.030 0.04 145 0.06 16

HD 4917 4794 ± 50 2.85 ± 0.17 0.08 ± 0.03 1.252 ± 0.040 0.08 137 0.10 16

HD 5891 4795 ± 22 2.50 ± 0.03 -0.35 ± 0.01 1.465 ± 0.030 0.05 133 0.06 16

HD 6019 5071 ± 21 3.09 ± 0.06 -0.48 ± 0.01 1.210 ± 0.030 0.04 146 0.05 16

HD 6030 4972 ± 25 3.27 ± 0.09 -0.02 ± 0.01 1.079 ± 0.030 0.05 136 0.08 17

HD 7530 5033 ± 18 3.24 ± 0.05 -0.33 ± 0.01 1.116 ± 0.020 0.04 138 0.03 12

HD 7931 4814 ± 29 3.07 ± 0.08 0.06 ± 0.02 1.100 ± 0.030 0.06 131 0.12 17

HD 7980 4750 ± 46 2.87 ± 0.20 0.06 ± 0.03 1.206 ± 0.040 0.08 139 0.13 17

HD 8375 5240 ± 11 3.60 ± 0.03 -0.03 ± 0.01 1.033 ± 0.020 0.03 134 0.05 16

HD 8407 4977 ± 18 3.05 ± 0.03 -0.25 ± 0.01 1.150 ± 0.020 0.04 138 0.07 16

HD 8508 4816 ± 26 2.57 ± 0.06 -0.28 ± 0.02 1.427 ± 0.030 0.06 138 0.11 15

HD 9156 5036 ± 18 2.80 ± 0.09 -0.09 ± 0.01 1.385 ± 0.030 0.05 143 0.09 17

HD 9218 4830 ± 25 2.91 ± 0.16 -0.14 ± 0.02 1.135 ± 0.030 0.05 135 0.08 16

HD 9313 4934 ± 29 3.28 ± 0.08 0.00 ± 0.02 0.915 ± 0.040 0.06 134 0.10 16

HD 9554 4813 ± 29 2.43 ± 0.14 -0.35 ± 0.02 1.432 ± 0.030 0.05 137 0.08 14

HD 9625 4964 ± 29 2.75 ± 0.11 -0.03 ± 0.02 1.345 ± 0.030 0.06 138 0.07 16

HD 10011 5115 ± 18 3.43 ± 0.08 -0.12 ± 0.01 1.092 ± 0.020 0.04 136 0.04 14

HD 10212 4929 ± 22 3.08 ± 0.05 -0.14 ± 0.01 1.070 ± 0.020 0.05 136 0.06 15

HD 10245 4671 ± 57 3.03 ± 0.13 0.17 ± 0.03 0.823 ± 0.070 0.11 132 0.11 8

Table 3 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 67 Table 3 (continued)

Star Teﬀ log g [Fe/H] ξ σ N σ N

(K) (km s−1) (Fe I) (Fe II) (Fe I) (Fe II)

HD 10383 4838 ± 43 3.14 ± 0.09 0.18 ± 0.03 1.141 ± 0.050 0.09 139 0.10 16

HD 10479 4941 ± 25 2.54 ± 0.09 -0.29 ± 0.02 1.474 ± 0.030 0.05 140 0.08 17

HD 10823 5167 ± 18 3.46 ± 0.07 -0.17 ± 0.01 1.083 ± 0.020 0.04 138 0.07 17

HD 10909 4855 ± 25 3.11 ± 0.04 -0.45 ± 0.01 1.443 ± 0.030 0.05 135 0.11 15

HD 11288 5218 ± 15 3.35 ± 0.07 0.01 ± 0.01 1.300 ± 0.030 0.05 139 0.10 15

HD 11970 5154 ± 11 3.53 ± 0.03 -0.26 ± 0.01 1.037 ± 0.020 0.03 136 0.04 15

HD 12137 4947 ± 25 3.05 ± 0.04 0.02 ± 0.02 1.136 ± 0.030 0.05 135 0.09 17

HD 12164 5486 ± 15 3.60 ± 0.03 -0.11 ± 0.01 1.244 ± 0.020 0.03 138 0.05 16

HD 13167 5744 ± 25 3.78 ± 0.07 0.21 ± 0.01 1.358 ± 0.020 0.03 132 0.06 15

HD 14787 5004 ± 25 3.29 ± 0.15 -0.05 ± 0.02 1.071 ± 0.030 0.05 141 0.06 15

HD 15336 5122 ± 25 3.16 ± 0.06 -0.19 ± 0.01 0.910 ± 0.030 0.05 137 0.10 16

HD 15391 4930 ± 22 2.89 ± 0.16 -0.45 ± 0.02 1.256 ± 0.020 0.04 142 0.05 15

HD 15928 5389 ± 18 3.67 ± 0.07 -0.25 ± 0.01 1.134 ± 0.030 0.03 141 0.05 16

HD 16175 5960 ± 25 4.10 ± 0.06 0.31 ± 0.02 1.272 ± 0.030 0.04 134 0.06 15

HD 16178 4967 ± 29 2.72 ± 0.10 -0.09 ± 0.02 1.384 ± 0.030 0.06 137 0.05 15

HD 16984 4917 ± 22 3.12 ± 0.08 -0.16 ± 0.02 1.075 ± 0.030 0.05 135 0.07 16

HD 17311 5054 ± 22 3.41 ± 0.12 -0.09 ± 0.01 1.059 ± 0.030 0.05 139 0.04 15

HD 17620 5230 ± 18 3.51 ± 0.04 -0.16 ± 0.01 1.125 ± 0.020 0.04 139 0.07 16

HD 18015 5643 ± 15 3.63 ± 0.07 -0.14 ± 0.01 1.328 ± 0.030 0.04 137 0.06 16

HD 18645 5517 ± 30 3.50 ± 0.03 0.04 ± 0.02 1.468 ± 0.040 0.07 137 0.06 13

HD 18667 4928 ± 25 3.11 ± 0.06 -0.09 ± 0.01 1.126 ± 0.030 0.05 141 0.08 16

HD 18742 4997 ± 18 3.13 ± 0.03 -0.14 ± 0.01 1.150 ± 0.030 0.05 133 0.05 15

HD 19522 5570 ± 11 3.83 ± 0.07 -0.12 ± 0.01 1.137 ± 0.020 0.03 134 0.03 15

HD 19659 5745 ± 20 3.72 ± 0.08 0.09 ± 0.02 1.317 ± 0.030 0.04 139 0.07 15

HD 21340 4948 ± 25 3.07 ± 0.03 -0.09 ± 0.01 1.131 ± 0.030 0.05 137 0.08 17

HD 21449 4745 ± 42 2.54 ± 0.09 0.01 ± 0.03 1.400 ± 0.030 0.07 135 0.10 16

HD 21581 4918 ± 29 2.31 ± 0.13 -1.61 ± 0.03 1.596 ± 0.110 0.06 89 0.04 13

HD 22233 5174 ± 25 3.13 ± 0.07 -0.02 ± 0.01 1.244 ± 0.020 0.04 134 0.09 16

HD 22657 4828 ± 25 3.07 ± 0.06 -0.03 ± 0.01 1.121 ± 0.030 0.05 137 0.10 16

Table 3 continued on next page 68 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 3 (continued)

Star Teﬀ log g [Fe/H] ξ σ N σ N

(K) (km s−1) (Fe I) (Fe II) (Fe I) (Fe II)

HD 22682 5055 ± 21 3.36 ± 0.13 -0.06 ± 0.01 1.059 ± 0.020 0.04 130 0.06 16

HD 22844 5265 ± 22 3.78 ± 0.06 0.21 ± 0.01 1.079 ± 0.030 0.05 137 0.07 16

HD 23134 4892 ± 26 3.17 ± 0.06 0.00 ± 0.02 1.041 ± 0.030 0.06 138 0.09 17

HD 23825 5640 ± 15 3.78 ± 0.06 0.13 ± 0.01 1.217 ± 0.030 0.04 141 0.06 15

HD 24148 4926 ± 25 3.10 ± 0.05 -0.10 ± 0.01 1.160 ± 0.030 0.05 135 0.06 15

HD 24316 4792 ± 26 2.87 ± 0.08 -0.12 ± 0.02 1.190 ± 0.030 0.06 138 0.11 17

HD 24365 5205 ± 15 3.62 ± 0.03 -0.25 ± 0.01 1.042 ± 0.020 0.03 137 0.03 17

HD 25622 5021 ± 25 3.12 ± 0.07 -0.06 ± 0.02 1.144 ± 0.030 0.05 140 0.07 16

HD 25975 4974 ± 39 3.37 ± 0.11 0.09 ± 0.02 1.034 ± 0.030 0.06 137 0.07 15

HD 26007 4830 ± 25 2.73 ± 0.06 -0.27 ± 0.01 1.239 ± 0.030 0.05 135 0.07 16

HD 26634 4943 ± 22 3.04 ± 0.05 -0.27 ± 0.01 1.158 ± 0.020 0.04 136 0.05 16

HD 27297 5174 ± 21 3.56 ± 0.06 -0.03 ± 0.01 1.021 ± 0.030 0.04 139 0.05 15

HD 27956 4885 ± 25 3.03 ± 0.05 -0.18 ± 0.01 1.131 ± 0.030 0.05 137 0.07 16

HD 28678 5091 ± 25 3.21 ± 0.13 -0.15 ± 0.02 1.188 ± 0.030 0.04 137 0.05 15

HD 28737 4736 ± 25 2.81 ± 0.14 -0.24 ± 0.02 1.121 ± 0.030 0.05 133 0.10 14

HD 30090 5365 ± 26 3.50 ± 0.05 -0.25 ± 0.02 0.788 ± 0.050 0.06 134 0.08 11

HD 30128 4981 ± 31 3.00 ± 0.06 0.15 ± 0.02 1.246 ± 0.030 0.07 136 0.11 17

HD 30166 4825 ± 36 2.86 ± 0.18 -0.10 ± 0.03 1.176 ± 0.030 0.06 135 0.10 17

HD 30856 4967 ± 25 3.17 ± 0.09 -0.11 ± 0.02 1.091 ± 0.030 0.05 138 0.07 16

HD 30882 4831 ± 33 2.91 ± 0.16 -0.14 ± 0.02 1.142 ± 0.030 0.05 134 0.09 17

HD 31018 5911 ± 22 3.91 ± 0.08 0.16 ± 0.01 1.428 ± 0.030 0.04 138 0.04 15

HD 31451 4975 ± 25 3.31 ± 0.06 -0.09 ± 0.01 1.053 ± 0.030 0.05 136 0.08 17

HD 31543 5637 ± 38 3.89 ± 0.16 0.06 ± 0.02 1.224 ± 0.060 0.08 128 0.11 9

HD 31693 4998 ± 29 3.28 ± 0.15 -0.05 ± 0.03 1.081 ± 0.030 0.06 141 0.07 15

HD 33142 5013 ± 22 3.37 ± 0.08 0.06 ± 0.01 1.018 ± 0.030 0.05 135 0.10 17

HD 33240 4785 ± 33 2.37 ± 0.08 -0.13 ± 0.02 1.468 ± 0.030 0.07 129 0.09 12

HD 33298 5413 ± 14 3.75 ± 0.04 -0.20 ± 0.01 1.138 ± 0.020 0.02 135 0.03 16

HD 33844 4833 ± 36 3.14 ± 0.07 0.18 ± 0.02 1.194 ± 0.040 0.08 135 0.11 15

HD 34538 4913 ± 20 3.08 ± 0.06 -0.28 ± 0.01 1.102 ± 0.020 0.04 138 0.06 14

Table 3 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 69 Table 3 (continued)

Star Teﬀ log g [Fe/H] ξ σ N σ N

(K) (km s−1) (Fe I) (Fe II) (Fe I) (Fe II)

HD 34909 5022 ± 22 3.13 ± 0.04 -0.02 ± 0.01 1.133 ± 0.020 0.04 133 0.08 17

HD 37445 4902 ± 29 2.62 ± 0.09 -0.14 ± 0.02 1.392 ± 0.030 0.06 140 0.08 15

HD 37601 4963 ± 22 3.24 ± 0.06 0.06 ± 0.01 1.098 ± 0.030 0.05 137 0.07 15

HD 38505 5001 ± 29 3.54 ± 0.06 0.12 ± 0.02 0.993 ± 0.040 0.06 132 0.08 14

HD 39142 4789 ± 26 2.50 ± 0.07 -0.16 ± 0.02 1.370 ± 0.030 0.06 138 0.09 16

HD 39731 5181 ± 25 3.03 ± 0.04 0.01 ± 0.01 1.354 ± 0.030 0.05 142 0.07 14

HD 39828 4931 ± 29 3.14 ± 0.06 0.04 ± 0.02 1.146 ± 0.030 0.06 133 0.09 17

HD 40537 5006 ± 18 3.49 ± 0.06 -0.16 ± 0.01 0.993 ± 0.030 0.04 136 0.09 16

HD 45210 5659 ± 26 3.59 ± 0.07 -0.09 ± 0.02 1.343 ± 0.040 0.05 140 0.06 13

HD 45410 4998 ± 18 3.22 ± 0.04 -0.08 ± 0.01 1.096 ± 0.020 0.04 134 0.07 16

HD 45506 5113 ± 18 3.31 ± 0.06 -0.01 ± 0.01 1.174 ± 0.020 0.04 135 0.07 16

HD 47562 5043 ± 25 3.12 ± 0.06 -0.30 ± 0.01 1.166 ± 0.030 0.04 136 0.07 16

HD 48122 5100 ± 21 3.20 ± 0.04 -0.49 ± 0.01 1.130 ± 0.030 0.04 136 0.04 17

HD 50275 4951 ± 29 3.21 ± 0.11 0.10 ± 0.03 1.128 ± 0.030 0.06 136 0.06 14

HD 51272 4872 ± 33 2.99 ± 0.06 0.03 ± 0.02 1.105 ± 0.030 0.06 139 0.10 17

HD 64413 4928 ± 20 2.51 ± 0.05 -0.41 ± 0.01 1.505 ± 0.020 0.04 133 0.07 15

HD 64730 5173 ± 29 3.48 ± 0.07 -0.07 ± 0.02 0.799 ± 0.050 0.08 137 0.13 14

HD 72003 4868 ± 29 3.02 ± 0.07 -0.03 ± 0.02 1.121 ± 0.030 0.06 138 0.10 17

HD 72440 5652 ± 25 3.75 ± 0.07 -0.05 ± 0.01 1.280 ± 0.030 0.04 145 0.06 16

HD 72490 5018 ± 25 3.23 ± 0.06 -0.20 ± 0.01 1.139 ± 0.030 0.05 141 0.07 17

HD 74390 4890 ± 32 3.15 ± 0.06 0.08 ± 0.02 1.140 ± 0.040 0.07 136 0.10 16

HD 76445 4858 ± 25 3.23 ± 0.07 -0.16 ± 0.01 1.008 ± 0.030 0.05 136 0.08 14

HD 77172 4887 ± 25 3.25 ± 0.07 -0.03 ± 0.01 1.053 ± 0.030 0.05 133 0.10 17

HD 77818 4821 ± 29 3.09 ± 0.06 -0.11 ± 0.02 1.097 ± 0.030 0.06 139 0.11 15

HD 80811 4997 ± 11 3.53 ± 0.04 -0.44 ± 0.01 0.924 ± 0.030 0.04 140 0.05 14

HD 82074 5175 ± 11 3.46 ± 0.07 -0.34 ± 0.01 1.116 ± 0.020 0.03 137 0.05 15

HD 82886 5099 ± 15 3.27 ± 0.06 -0.27 ± 0.01 1.157 ± 0.020 0.04 138 0.05 17

HD 83024 4794 ± 36 2.98 ± 0.06 0.09 ± 0.02 1.190 ± 0.040 0.08 133 0.11 17

HD 83394 4992 ± 14 3.20 ± 0.04 -0.26 ± 0.01 1.091 ± 0.030 0.04 141 0.06 16

Table 3 continued on next page 70 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 3 (continued)

Star Teﬀ log g [Fe/H] ξ σ N σ N

(K) (km s−1) (Fe I) (Fe II) (Fe I) (Fe II)

HD 83752 6089 ± 63 3.93 ± 0.13 0.18 ± 0.02 1.396 ± 0.050 0.07 135 0.10 13

HD 85440 5192 ± 18 3.51 ± 0.04 -0.04 ± 0.01 1.071 ± 0.020 0.03 131 0.06 17

HD 85472 5351 ± 11 3.76 ± 0.03 -0.01 ± 0.01 1.059 ± 0.020 0.02 130 0.05 16

HD 87230 5026 ± 32 3.17 ± 0.09 0.09 ± 0.02 1.220 ± 0.030 0.06 138 0.10 17

HD 87669 4806 ± 31 2.99 ± 0.09 -0.07 ± 0.02 1.125 ± 0.030 0.06 134 0.11 14

HD 88134 4909 ± 33 3.10 ± 0.09 0.03 ± 0.03 1.115 ± 0.040 0.07 137 0.09 17

HD 88654 5275 ± 28 3.61 ± 0.06 0.11 ± 0.02 1.180 ± 0.030 0.05 140 0.08 17

HD 89391 4943 ± 25 3.30 ± 0.06 -0.18 ± 0.01 1.075 ± 0.030 0.05 138 0.09 17

HD 90043 5005 ± 22 3.26 ± 0.04 -0.02 ± 0.01 1.081 ± 0.030 0.05 140 0.06 15

HD 90792 4909 ± 29 2.51 ± 0.08 -0.06 ± 0.03 1.595 ± 0.030 0.06 135 0.10 16

HD 93396 5402 ± 18 3.83 ± 0.06 0.30 ± 0.01 1.122 ± 0.030 0.04 132 0.05 15

HD 93461 5113 ± 18 3.48 ± 0.04 -0.04 ± 0.01 1.055 ± 0.030 0.05 139 0.06 16

HD 93864 5029 ± 15 3.41 ± 0.04 -0.21 ± 0.01 1.023 ± 0.020 0.04 138 0.06 17

HD 94834 4856 ± 33 3.20 ± 0.13 0.08 ± 0.02 1.012 ± 0.030 0.05 128 0.12 16

HD 95089 4950 ± 29 3.22 ± 0.06 0.06 ± 0.02 1.110 ± 0.030 0.06 138 0.08 16

HD 95526 4911 ± 25 3.19 ± 0.06 -0.13 ± 0.01 1.033 ± 0.030 0.04 135 0.08 17

HD 96063 5120 ± 15 3.42 ± 0.06 -0.19 ± 0.01 1.078 ± 0.020 0.03 134 0.05 15

HD 96683 5107 ± 29 3.35 ± 0.18 0.17 ± 0.03 1.189 ± 0.030 0.06 140 0.08 14

HD 97601 5112 ± 25 3.20 ± 0.09 -0.08 ± 0.02 1.178 ± 0.030 0.05 138 0.05 14

HD 98219 4970 ± 25 3.32 ± 0.11 0.03 ± 0.02 1.011 ± 0.030 0.05 138 0.08 16

HD 99706 4912 ± 26 3.10 ± 0.06 0.05 ± 0.02 1.128 ± 0.030 0.06 138 0.09 17

HD 100337 4998 ± 25 3.17 ± 0.06 -0.14 ± 0.01 1.103 ± 0.030 0.04 135 0.08 17

HD 102329 4760 ± 38 2.77 ± 0.14 0.12 ± 0.03 1.190 ± 0.030 0.06 134 0.11 16

HD 102444 5304 ± 15 3.69 ± 0.03 -0.05 ± 0.01 1.109 ± 0.020 0.03 141 0.06 16

HD 102956 5025 ± 29 3.38 ± 0.16 0.16 ± 0.02 1.073 ± 0.040 0.06 136 0.10 17

HD 103616 5166 ± 25 3.76 ± 0.10 -0.06 ± 0.02 0.906 ± 0.040 0.06 135 0.12 15

HD 104017 4784 ± 40 3.03 ± 0.07 0.15 ± 0.03 1.115 ± 0.040 0.08 135 0.11 13

HD 106270 5567 ± 11 3.76 ± 0.03 0.06 ± 0.01 1.186 ± 0.020 0.03 140 0.04 15

HD 106279 4908 ± 22 2.52 ± 0.03 -0.34 ± 0.01 1.439 ± 0.020 0.05 134 0.05 16

Table 3 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 71 Table 3 (continued)

Star Teﬀ log g [Fe/H] ξ σ N σ N

(K) (km s−1) (Fe I) (Fe II) (Fe I) (Fe II)

HD 107990 4880 ± 29 2.63 ± 0.09 -0.07 ± 0.02 1.382 ± 0.030 0.05 136 0.08 16

HD 108189 5388 ± 15 3.52 ± 0.04 -0.06 ± 0.01 1.216 ± 0.030 0.05 140 0.09 16

HD 108863 4871 ± 26 3.02 ± 0.04 0.07 ± 0.02 1.151 ± 0.030 0.06 139 0.10 16

HD 109159 5219 ± 15 3.64 ± 0.04 -0.13 ± 0.01 1.033 ± 0.020 0.03 137 0.05 16

HD 109218 5320 ± 14 3.73 ± 0.04 -0.10 ± 0.01 1.078 ± 0.020 0.03 135 0.03 15

HD 109929 6128 ± 36 4.16 ± 0.04 0.36 ± 0.02 1.518 ± 0.040 0.05 132 0.05 14

HD 112115 4708 ± 58 2.55 ± 0.13 0.09 ± 0.03 1.266 ± 0.050 0.10 130 0.12 15

HD 112973 4941 ± 18 3.18 ± 0.03 -0.31 ± 0.01 1.085 ± 0.020 0.04 141 0.05 15

HD 112988 4906 ± 11 3.16 ± 0.03 -0.32 ± 0.01 1.050 ± 0.020 0.04 137 0.07 15

HD 114161 4856 ± 38 2.95 ± 0.10 0.09 ± 0.02 1.183 ± 0.030 0.07 134 0.09 17

HD 114659 4850 ± 36 3.07 ± 0.09 0.06 ± 0.03 1.144 ± 0.030 0.06 132 0.10 16

HD 116029 4874 ± 36 3.17 ± 0.09 0.12 ± 0.02 1.105 ± 0.040 0.08 139 0.11 17

HD 117623 4946 ± 29 2.92 ± 0.09 -0.07 ± 0.02 0.740 ± 0.040 0.07 141 0.08 17

HD 117762 5187 ± 15 3.46 ± 0.07 -0.33 ± 0.01 1.064 ± 0.020 0.03 133 0.05 15

HD 118082 4850 ± 29 3.07 ± 0.06 0.07 ± 0.02 1.111 ± 0.030 0.06 137 0.12 17

HD 118744 4819 ± 33 2.84 ± 0.19 -0.06 ± 0.03 1.219 ± 0.030 0.06 136 0.05 14

HD 120531 4963 ± 25 3.10 ± 0.06 -0.22 ± 0.01 1.164 ± 0.030 0.05 138 0.07 16

HD 122253 5078 ± 15 3.43 ± 0.08 -0.03 ± 0.01 1.010 ± 0.020 0.04 135 0.07 17

HD 123239 4850 ± 22 2.95 ± 0.06 -0.16 ± 0.01 1.161 ± 0.030 0.05 134 0.05 15

HD 124641 4731 ± 29 2.67 ± 0.10 -0.14 ± 0.02 1.202 ± 0.030 0.06 132 0.09 17

HD 125217 4887 ± 36 3.17 ± 0.09 0.15 ± 0.02 1.107 ± 0.040 0.08 131 0.11 15

HD 125390 4882 ± 29 3.04 ± 0.04 -0.11 ± 0.02 1.129 ± 0.030 0.06 140 0.10 17

HD 125607 5027 ± 32 3.33 ± 0.08 0.01 ± 0.02 1.056 ± 0.030 0.05 134 0.08 14

HD 126991 5175 ± 14 3.40 ± 0.07 -0.59 ± 0.01 1.118 ± 0.030 0.03 132 0.04 15

HD 127374 4908 ± 29 2.59 ± 0.09 -0.22 ± 0.02 1.392 ± 0.030 0.05 139 0.08 17

HD 128095 4987 ± 25 3.38 ± 0.06 -0.06 ± 0.01 1.028 ± 0.030 0.05 135 0.07 16

HD 128720 5048 ± 29 3.50 ± 0.04 0.14 ± 0.02 1.060 ± 0.040 0.06 143 0.07 15

HD 131496 4834 ± 33 3.06 ± 0.09 0.11 ± 0.02 1.121 ± 0.030 0.06 136 0.12 17

HD 136418 4973 ± 22 3.38 ± 0.08 -0.08 ± 0.01 1.024 ± 0.030 0.05 138 0.06 15

Table 3 continued on next page 72 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 3 (continued)

Star Teﬀ log g [Fe/H] ξ σ N σ N

(K) (km s−1) (Fe I) (Fe II) (Fe I) (Fe II)

HD 136513 4887 ± 25 2.94 ± 0.10 -0.24 ± 0.01 1.191 ± 0.030 0.05 138 0.07 17

HD 140025 5564 ± 15 3.87 ± 0.08 0.18 ± 0.01 1.130 ± 0.020 0.04 138 0.09 17

HD 141712 5178 ± 22 3.51 ± 0.03 0.10 ± 0.01 1.155 ± 0.030 0.05 137 0.07 15

HD 142091 4863 ± 29 3.11 ± 0.07 0.13 ± 0.02 1.099 ± 0.030 0.07 135 0.11 16

HD 142245 4838 ± 36 3.27 ± 0.09 0.20 ± 0.02 1.055 ± 0.040 0.07 134 0.10 14

HD 144363 4975 ± 25 3.26 ± 0.06 -0.11 ± 0.01 1.028 ± 0.030 0.05 135 0.07 17

HD 145428 4836 ± 32 3.05 ± 0.07 -0.25 ± 0.02 1.071 ± 0.030 0.04 136 0.08 16

HD 146278 4785 ± 29 2.82 ± 0.13 -0.08 ± 0.02 1.182 ± 0.030 0.06 131 0.09 17

HD 150331 5726 ± 35 2.60 ± 0.09 -0.18 ± 0.02 2.156 ± 0.050 0.06 132 0.06 12

HD 152581 5156 ± 18 3.36 ± 0.06 -0.28 ± 0.01 1.146 ± 0.020 0.04 133 0.06 16

HD 152733 4842 ± 26 3.04 ± 0.06 0.04 ± 0.02 1.108 ± 0.030 0.06 135 0.09 17

HD 155413 5824 ± 25 3.81 ± 0.07 0.24 ± 0.01 1.412 ± 0.030 0.04 140 0.07 16

HD 158038 4871 ± 50 3.26 ± 0.18 0.20 ± 0.03 1.166 ± 0.050 0.10 139 0.10 15

HD 158449 5060 ± 11 3.27 ± 0.06 -0.21 ± 0.01 1.144 ± 0.020 0.04 141 0.06 15

HD 160215 4912 ± 25 3.34 ± 0.08 -0.01 ± 0.01 0.994 ± 0.030 0.05 138 0.09 15

HD 163528 4995 ± 29 3.18 ± 0.04 0.01 ± 0.02 1.105 ± 0.030 0.06 141 0.07 15

HD 166494 5705 ± 20 3.74 ± 0.08 0.21 ± 0.02 1.377 ± 0.030 0.05 141 0.07 15

HD 167042 4971 ± 22 3.26 ± 0.09 0.05 ± 0.01 1.075 ± 0.020 0.05 136 0.07 17

HD 171264 5272 ± 18 3.65 ± 0.04 -0.02 ± 0.01 1.115 ± 0.020 0.04 140 0.07 16

HD 175541 5101 ± 18 3.47 ± 0.07 -0.08 ± 0.01 1.068 ± 0.020 0.04 137 0.04 14

HD 178251 4798 ± 21 2.72 ± 0.06 -0.63 ± 0.01 1.279 ± 0.030 0.05 143 0.04 14

HD 180053 5107 ± 32 3.43 ± 0.11 0.14 ± 0.02 1.187 ± 0.040 0.07 140 0.10 15

HD 180902 5006 ± 25 3.34 ± 0.08 0.03 ± 0.01 1.058 ± 0.030 0.05 139 0.09 17

HD 181342 4934 ± 36 3.22 ± 0.09 0.20 ± 0.02 1.147 ± 0.040 0.07 138 0.11 15

HD 183473 5634 ± 11 3.89 ± 0.07 -0.09 ± 0.01 1.240 ± 0.020 0.03 135 0.03 14

HD 185269 5998 ± 35 3.96 ± 0.05 0.12 ± 0.01 1.447 ± 0.040 0.04 136 0.07 16

HD 185351 5040 ± 26 3.28 ± 0.11 0.09 ± 0.02 1.112 ± 0.030 0.06 139 0.07 16

HD 185351 5039 ± 29 3.30 ± 0.08 0.10 ± 0.02 1.099 ± 0.030 0.06 137 0.08 16

HD 185351 5041 ± 29 3.23 ± 0.13 0.09 ± 0.03 1.118 ± 0.030 0.06 139 0.09 17

Table 3 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 73 Table 3 (continued)

Star Teﬀ log g [Fe/H] ξ σ N σ N

(K) (km s−1) (Fe I) (Fe II) (Fe I) (Fe II)

HD 187460 4662 ± 51 2.65 ± 0.14 -0.24 ± 0.03 1.271 ± 0.050 0.11 131 0.14 11

HD 188386 4965 ± 20 3.15 ± 0.06 -0.02 ± 0.01 1.098 ± 0.020 0.05 135 0.07 15

HD 192153 5206 ± 18 3.66 ± 0.08 -0.24 ± 0.01 1.014 ± 0.030 0.03 136 0.04 15

HD 192699 5140 ± 15 3.39 ± 0.07 -0.19 ± 0.01 1.127 ± 0.020 0.04 136 0.03 15

HD 193342 4940 ± 29 3.18 ± 0.07 0.05 ± 0.02 1.121 ± 0.030 0.06 139 0.09 16

HD 193391 4997 ± 26 3.02 ± 0.04 0.09 ± 0.02 1.230 ± 0.030 0.06 140 0.08 15

HD 194541 4803 ± 33 3.01 ± 0.04 0.09 ± 0.02 1.165 ± 0.030 0.07 137 0.10 17

HD 195787 5014 ± 11 3.30 ± 0.07 -0.12 ± 0.01 1.046 ± 0.020 0.04 133 0.05 15

HD 195824 5104 ± 18 3.42 ± 0.07 -0.08 ± 0.01 1.077 ± 0.030 0.04 135 0.08 17

HD 196645 5106 ± 18 3.47 ± 0.06 -0.11 ± 0.01 1.023 ± 0.020 0.03 133 0.06 16

HD 197162 4925 ± 25 3.19 ± 0.10 -0.34 ± 0.01 1.141 ± 0.030 0.04 137 0.09 17

HD 198599 4937 ± 43 2.87 ± 0.16 -0.06 ± 0.03 0.439 ± 0.060 0.08 138 0.11 15

HD 200081 4933 ± 25 2.73 ± 0.07 -0.10 ± 0.02 0.838 ± 0.030 0.06 137 0.10 16

HD 200491 5119 ± 15 3.03 ± 0.04 0.01 ± 0.01 1.281 ± 0.030 0.05 140 0.05 14

HD 200964 5064 ± 18 3.25 ± 0.06 -0.17 ± 0.01 1.122 ± 0.020 0.04 136 0.06 16

HD 202696 4857 ± 33 2.97 ± 0.07 0.05 ± 0.02 1.166 ± 0.030 0.07 138 0.10 17

HD 202867 5146 ± 21 3.56 ± 0.04 -0.10 ± 0.01 1.051 ± 0.030 0.04 136 0.06 15

HD 203471 5507 ± 18 3.80 ± 0.04 -0.03 ± 0.01 1.152 ± 0.020 0.03 137 0.06 14

HD 205163 5033 ± 43 2.89 ± 0.14 0.10 ± 0.02 1.371 ± 0.040 0.08 137 0.11 15

HD 206610 4836 ± 32 3.10 ± 0.07 0.10 ± 0.02 1.122 ± 0.040 0.07 132 0.11 16

HD 206635 5032 ± 18 3.64 ± 0.04 -0.22 ± 0.01 0.903 ± 0.030 0.04 135 0.07 16

HD 207077 5138 ± 11 3.32 ± 0.04 -0.40 ± 0.01 1.111 ± 0.020 0.03 138 0.03 13

HD 208585 5006 ± 35 3.21 ± 0.12 -0.04 ± 0.02 1.093 ± 0.030 0.05 136 0.08 17

HD 210011 5093 ± 29 2.79 ± 0.07 0.08 ± 0.02 1.194 ± 0.030 0.07 137 0.08 11

HD 210521 5100 ± 11 3.33 ± 0.06 -0.07 ± 0.01 1.117 ± 0.030 0.04 135 0.07 17

HD 210702 4974 ± 25 3.21 ± 0.06 0.07 ± 0.01 1.073 ± 0.030 0.05 136 0.08 17

HD 212771 5104 ± 15 3.44 ± 0.11 -0.09 ± 0.01 1.085 ± 0.020 0.04 140 0.06 16

HD 213278 5193 ± 11 3.52 ± 0.04 -0.26 ± 0.01 1.050 ± 0.020 0.03 139 0.04 15

HD 215049 5174 ± 18 3.72 ± 0.04 0.03 ± 0.01 1.007 ± 0.030 0.04 138 0.07 16

Table 3 continued on next page 74 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 3 (continued)

Star Teﬀ log g [Fe/H] ξ σ N σ N

(K) (km s−1) (Fe I) (Fe II) (Fe I) (Fe II)

HD 215549 4921 ± 25 3.26 ± 0.10 -0.28 ± 0.01 1.029 ± 0.030 0.05 144 0.08 16

HD 215908 5131 ± 18 3.35 ± 0.07 -0.28 ± 0.01 1.157 ± 0.020 0.04 137 0.05 16

HD 216834 5123 ± 18 3.48 ± 0.04 -0.31 ± 0.01 1.053 ± 0.020 0.03 136 0.04 15

HD 217496 5074 ± 15 3.44 ± 0.07 -0.08 ± 0.01 1.073 ± 0.020 0.04 129 0.05 13

HD 217591 5108 ± 25 3.44 ± 0.10 -0.13 ± 0.01 1.139 ± 0.030 0.04 137 0.04 15

HD 217681 4977 ± 26 3.46 ± 0.08 0.16 ± 0.02 1.029 ± 0.030 0.06 135 0.12 17

HD 219553 4846 ± 36 3.13 ± 0.07 0.17 ± 0.02 1.147 ± 0.040 0.08 132 0.12 16

HD 220122 4865 ± 29 2.49 ± 0.07 -0.29 ± 0.02 1.471 ± 0.030 0.06 141 0.07 16

HD 220952 4976 ± 25 3.29 ± 0.07 0.03 ± 0.01 1.084 ± 0.030 0.05 137 0.06 15

HD 221504 5397 ± 22 3.80 ± 0.09 0.29 ± 0.01 1.130 ± 0.030 0.05 138 0.07 14

HD 222112 4817 ± 43 3.07 ± 0.09 0.17 ± 0.03 1.145 ± 0.050 0.09 137 0.13 16

HD 223627 4792 ± 29 2.94 ± 0.11 -0.04 ± 0.02 1.133 ± 0.030 0.06 138 0.11 17

HD 224032 5806 ± 31 4.03 ± 0.07 0.41 ± 0.02 1.369 ± 0.040 0.06 135 0.09 15

HD 224679 5757 ± 29 3.67 ± 0.06 0.08 ± 0.02 1.345 ± 0.040 0.05 137 0.07 14

HD 225021 4979 ± 29 2.95 ± 0.08 0.19 ± 0.02 1.308 ± 0.030 0.06 132 0.09 14

HD 236427 5162 ± 18 3.68 ± 0.04 0.02 ± 0.01 1.004 ± 0.020 0.04 137 0.05 16

HIP 43212 4937 ± 31 2.92 ± 0.12 0.08 ± 0.02 1.306 ± 0.030 0.06 139 0.08 16

HIP 87123 4806 ± 39 3.02 ± 0.08 -0.20 ± 0.03 1.058 ± 0.030 0.06 139 0.08 15 Retired A Stars Revisited 75

Table 4. Atmospheric Parameters Sensitivities.

Parameter ∆Teﬀ ∆log g ∆[Fe/H] ∆ξ

(±100K) (±0.20 dex) (±0.20 dex) (±0.200 km s−1)

−79 +29 +72 Teﬀ (K) ··· +29 −30 −37

+0.27 −0.05 +0.20 log g (dex) −0.22 ··· +0.02 −0.09

+0.08 +0.01 −0.02 [Fe/H] (dex) −0.07 −0.01 ··· +0.05

−1 −0.044 −0.098 +0.020 ξ (km s ) −0.009 +0.043 −0.024 ··· 76 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

Table 5. Broadening Parameters.

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 1100 0.112 4.00 0.6 ± 0.8

HD 1293 0.112 3.51 2.2 ± 0.6

HD 1384 0.112 3.39 2.4 ± 0.4

HD 1502 0.112 3.43 1.2 ± 1.0

HD 2946 0.112 3.82 3.4 ± 0.8

HD 3458 0.112 4.00 3.2 ± 0.6

HD 4313 0.112 3.41 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 4395 0.112 4.03 1.2 ± 1.0

HD 4917 0.112 4.00 2.2 ± 0.6

HD 5891 0.096 4.00 3.2 ± 0.4

HD 6019 0.112 3.46 1.0 ± 0.8

HD 6030 0.112 3.42 1.2 ± 0.6

HD 7530 0.112 3.45 1.6 ± 0.8

HD 7931 0.112 3.38 1.8 ± 0.6

Table 5 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 77 Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 7980 0.112 4.00 1.0 ± 0.8

HD 8375 0.096 3.56 0.6 ± 0.8

HD 8407 0.112 3.42 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 8508 0.112 4.00 3.6 ± 0.4

HD 9156 0.112 4.00 2.6 ± 0.6

HD 9218 0.096 4.00 0.0 ± 0.8

HD 9313 0.112 3.41 1.6 ± 0.8

HD 9554 0.112 4.00 3.2 ± 0.6

HD 9625 0.112 4.00 2.2 ± 0.6

HD 10011 0.112 3.48 2.0 ± 0.6

HD 10212 0.112 3.41 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 10245 0.112 3.35 2.6 ± 0.8

HD 10383 0.112 3.38 1.8 ± 0.8

HD 10479 0.112 4.00 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 10823 0.112 3.51 0.4 ± 1.0

HD 10909 0.112 3.39 3.8 ± 0.4

HD 11288 0.112 3.54 5.0 ± 0.4

Table 5 continued on next page 78 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 11970 0.112 3.50 0.8 ± 0.8

HD 12137 0.112 3.41 2.4 ± 0.4

HD 12164 0.112 3.82 0.4 ± 1.2

HD 13167 0.112 4.36 2.8 ± 0.6

HD 14787 0.112 3.43 1.6 ± 0.8

HD 15336 0.112 3.49 2.6 ± 0.4

HD 15391 0.112 4.00 1.2 ± 1.0

HD 15928 0.112 3.69 2.2 ± 0.6

HD 16175 0.096 4.42 4.2 ± 0.6

HD 16178 0.112 4.00 1.6 ± 0.8

HD 16984 0.112 3.40 1.4 ± 0.8

HD 17311 0.112 3.45 1.2 ± 0.6

HD 17620 0.112 3.55 2.8 ± 0.6

HD 18015 0.112 4.10 3.4 ± 0.8

HD 18645 0.112 3.86 8.8 ± 0.6

HD 18667 0.112 3.41 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 18742 0.112 3.43 1.6 ± 0.6

Table 5 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 79 Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 19522 0.096 3.95 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 19659 0.096 4.37 4.2 ± 0.4

HD 21340 0.096 3.41 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 21449 0.112 4.00 2.6 ± 0.4

HD 21581 0.112 4.00 0.0 ± 3.4

HD 22233 0.112 3.52 3.0 ± 0.4

HD 22657 0.112 3.38 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 22682 0.112 3.45 0.4 ± 0.8

HD 22844 0.112 3.58 2.0 ± 0.6

HD 23134 0.112 3.40 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 23825 0.112 4.09 3.2 ± 0.8

HD 24148 0.112 3.41 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 24316 0.112 4.00 1.0 ± 0.8

HD 24365 0.096 3.54 0.0 ± 0.8

HD 25622 0.112 3.44 2.4 ± 0.4

HD 25975 0.112 3.42 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 26007 0.112 4.00 1.2 ± 0.8

Table 5 continued on next page 80 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 26634 0.112 3.41 1.4 ± 0.8

HD 27297 0.112 3.52 1.2 ± 0.8

HD 27956 0.112 3.40 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 28678 0.112 3.47 1.0 ± 0.8

HD 28737 0.112 4.00 0.0 ± 1.0

HD 30090 0.065 3.67 3.0 ± 0.2

HD 30128 0.112 3.43 2.8 ± 0.4

HD 30166 0.112 4.00 1.2 ± 0.6

HD 30856 0.112 3.42 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 30882 0.096 4.00 0.6 ± 0.8

HD 31018 0.112 5.00 3.4 ± 0.6

HD 31451 0.096 3.42 0.8 ± 0.6

HD 31543 0.112 4.09 2.6 ± 0.6

HD 31693 0.112 3.43 2.0 ± 0.6

HD 33142 0.112 3.44 1.2 ± 0.8

HD 33240 0.112 4.00 4.8 ± 0.2

HD 33298 0.096 3.72 0.0 ± 1.0

Table 5 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 81 Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 33844 0.112 3.38 2.0 ± 0.6

HD 34538 0.112 3.40 1.4 ± 0.6

HD 34909 0.112 3.44 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 37445 0.096 4.00 1.0 ± 0.8

HD 37601 0.112 3.42 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 38505 0.112 3.43 1.6 ± 0.8

HD 39142 0.112 4.00 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 39731 0.112 3.52 2.6 ± 0.6

HD 39828 0.112 3.41 2.4 ± 0.4

HD 40537 0.112 3.43 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 45210 0.096 4.14 6.8 ± 0.4

HD 45410 0.096 3.43 1.4 ± 0.4

HD 45506 0.112 3.48 1.2 ± 0.6

HD 47562 0.112 3.45 2.6 ± 0.4

HD 48122 0.096 3.48 1.2 ± 0.6

HD 50275 0.096 3.42 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 51272 0.096 4.00 1.2 ± 0.6

Table 5 continued on next page 82 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 64413 0.112 4.00 3.2 ± 0.4

HD 64730 0.112 3.51 2.8 ± 0.6

HD 72003 0.112 3.39 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 72440 0.112 4.12 4.4 ± 0.6

HD 72490 0.112 3.44 2.4 ± 0.4

HD 74390 0.112 3.40 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 76445 0.112 3.39 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 77172 0.112 3.40 1.4 ± 0.8

HD 77818 0.112 3.38 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 80811 0.112 3.43 1.4 ± 0.8

HD 82074 0.112 3.52 0.8 ± 0.8

HD 82886 0.096 3.47 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 83024 0.112 4.00 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 83394 0.096 3.43 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 83752 0.112 6.09 4.2 ± 1.0

HD 85440 0.096 3.53 2.0 ± 0.6

HD 85472 0.096 3.65 1.2 ± 0.6

Table 5 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 83 Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 87230 0.112 3.44 3.4 ± 0.6

HD 87669 0.112 4.00 1.0 ± 0.8

HD 88134 0.096 3.40 1.2 ± 0.4

HD 88654 0.112 3.59 1.4 ± 0.8

HD 89391 0.112 3.41 2.0 ± 0.4

HD 90043 0.096 3.43 1.4 ± 0.4

HD 90792 0.112 4.00 2.8 ± 0.4

HD 93396 0.112 3.71 1.6 ± 0.8

HD 93461 0.112 3.48 2.0 ± 0.4

HD 93864 0.096 3.44 0.0 ± 0.8

HD 94834 0.096 3.39 0.6 ± 0.8

HD 95089 0.112 3.42 2.0 ± 0.6

HD 95526 0.096 3.40 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 96063 0.096 3.49 0.0 ± 1.0

HD 96683 0.096 3.48 1.2 ± 0.6

HD 97601 0.096 3.48 2.4 ± 0.4

HD 98219 0.096 3.42 0.4 ± 0.8

Table 5 continued on next page 84 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 99706 0.096 3.40 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 100337 0.096 3.43 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 102329 0.096 4.00 1.2 ± 0.6

HD 102444 0.096 3.61 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 102956 0.096 3.44 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 103616 0.096 3.51 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 104017 0.096 3.37 1.4 ± 0.8

HD 106270 0.096 3.95 2.6 ± 0.4

HD 106279 0.096 4.00 2.0 ± 0.4

HD 107990 0.096 4.00 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 108189 0.096 3.69 6.4 ± 0.4

HD 108863 0.096 3.39 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 109159 0.096 3.54 0.0 ± 1.0

HD 109218 0.096 3.62 0.0 ± 1.0

HD 109929 0.112 5.59 7.2 ± 0.6

HD 112115 0.096 4.00 1.4 ± 0.8

HD 112973 0.096 3.41 0.8 ± 0.8

Table 5 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 85 Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 112988 0.096 3.40 0.0 ± 1.0

HD 114161 0.096 4.00 0.4 ± 1.0

HD 114659 0.096 3.39 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 116029 0.096 3.39 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 117623 0.096 4.00 2.6 ± 0.4

HD 117762 0.112 3.52 0.0 ± 1.4

HD 118082 0.112 3.39 2.6 ± 0.4

HD 118744 0.096 4.00 0.0 ± 0.8

HD 120531 0.112 3.42 2.6 ± 0.4

HD 122253 0.096 3.46 0.6 ± 0.8

HD 123239 0.096 4.00 0.0 ± 0.8

HD 124641 0.096 4.00 0.0 ± 0.8

HD 125217 0.112 3.40 2.8 ± 0.4

HD 125390 0.112 3.40 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 125607 0.096 3.44 0.4 ± 0.8

HD 126991 0.096 3.52 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 127374 0.112 4.00 1.0 ± 0.8

Table 5 continued on next page 86 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 128095 0.096 3.43 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 128720 0.112 3.45 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 131496 0.096 3.38 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 136418 0.096 3.42 0.8 ± 0.8

HD 136513 0.096 4.00 0.0 ± 0.6

HD 140025 0.096 3.94 0.0 ± 1.0

HD 141712 0.112 3.52 1.6 ± 0.8

HD 142091 0.096 3.39 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 142245 0.112 3.38 1.4 ± 0.8

HD 144363 0.096 3.42 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 145428 0.096 3.38 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 146278 0.096 4.00 0.0 ± 0.8

HD 150331 0.112 4.00 6.0 ± 0.6

HD 152581 0.096 3.50 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 152733 0.096 3.39 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 155413 0.096 4.63 4.0 ± 0.4

HD 158038 0.096 3.39 0.8 ± 0.8

Table 5 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 87 Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 158449 0.096 3.46 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 160215 0.096 3.40 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 163528 0.112 3.43 1.2 ± 0.6

HD 166494 0.096 4.25 5.8 ± 0.6

HD 167042 0.096 3.42 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 171264 0.112 3.58 1.4 ± 0.8

HD 175541 0.096 3.48 0.8 ± 0.6

HD 178251 0.112 4.00 0.0 ± 1.4

HD 180053 0.096 3.48 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 180902 0.112 3.43 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 181342 0.112 3.41 2.4 ± 0.6

HD 183473 0.112 4.08 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 185269 0.096 5.46 4.0 ± 0.8

HD 185351 0.096 3.45 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 185351 0.096 3.45 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 187460 0.112 4.00 4.2 ± 0.6

Table 5 continued on next page 88 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 188386 0.096 3.42 1.2 ± 0.4

HD 192153 0.112 3.54 1.0 ± 0.8

HD 192699 0.096 3.50 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 193342 0.112 3.41 0.0 ± 0.8

HD 193391 0.112 3.43 3.4 ± 0.4

HD 194541 0.112 3.38 1.2 ± 0.6

HD 195787 0.112 3.44 0.0 ± 0.6

HD 195824 0.112 3.48 1.2 ± 0.6

HD 196645 0.112 3.48 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 197162 0.112 3.41 0.8 ± 0.8

HD 198599 0.112 4.00 3.4 ± 0.4

HD 200081 0.112 4.00 3.4 ± 0.6

HD 200491 0.112 3.48 2.6 ± 0.4

HD 200964 0.112 3.46 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 202696 0.112 4.00 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 202867 0.112 3.50 2.0 ± 0.6

HD 203471 0.112 3.85 5.2 ± 0.6

Table 5 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 89 Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 205163 0.096 4.00 4.8 ± 0.4

HD 206610 0.112 3.38 1.6 ± 0.8

HD 206635 0.112 3.44 0.0 ± 1.4

HD 207077 0.112 3.49 1.8 ± 0.8

HD 208585 0.112 3.43 2.0 ± 0.4

HD 210011 0.112 4.00 4.2 ± 0.4

HD 210521 0.112 3.48 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 210702 0.096 3.42 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 212771 0.112 3.48 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 213278 0.112 3.53 1.2 ± 0.8

HD 215049 0.112 3.52 0.6 ± 0.8

HD 215549 0.112 3.41 1.6 ± 0.8

HD 215908 0.112 3.49 1.8 ± 0.6

HD 216834 0.112 3.49 1.0 ± 0.8

HD 217496 0.112 3.46 1.6 ± 0.6

HD 217591 0.112 3.48 1.6 ± 0.8

HD 217681 0.112 3.42 2.0 ± 0.6

Table 5 continued on next page 90 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 5 (continued)

Star FWHMinst Vmacro v sin i

(A)˚ (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 219553 0.112 3.39 2.6 ± 0.4

HD 220122 0.112 4.00 2.4 ± 0.4

HD 220952 0.112 3.42 0.0 ± 1.2

HD 221504 0.112 3.70 2.2 ± 0.4

HD 222112 0.112 3.38 2.6 ± 0.4

HD 223627 0.112 4.00 1.0 ± 0.6

HD 224032 0.096 3.63 4.6 ± 0.4

HD 224679 0.112 4.40 7.6 ± 0.6

HD 225021 0.112 4.00 2.8 ± 0.4

HD 236427 0.112 3.51 1.0 ± 0.6

HIP 43212 0.096 4.00 2.4 ± 0.4

HIP 87123 0.096 3.38 0.8 ± 0.8 Retired A Stars Revisited 91

Table 6. Evolutionary Parameters.

Star M R log g Age

(M⊙) (R⊙) (Gyr)

HD 1100 1.284 ± 0.112 5.627 ± 0.648 3.018 ± 0.075 4.449 ± 1.303

HD 1293 1.250 ± 0.099 3.674 ± 0.502 3.377 ± 0.088 3.672 ± 0.929

HD 1384 1.381 ± 0.105 3.581 ± 0.449 3.443 ± 0.092 4.067 ± 0.935

HD 1502 1.540 ± 0.097 4.355 ± 0.532 3.319 ± 0.081 2.617 ± 0.479

HD 2946 1.452 ± 0.111 3.221 ± 0.471 3.556 ± 0.092 2.638 ± 0.566

HD 3458 2.102 ± 0.257 6.393 ± 1.469 3.121 ± 0.147 1.019 ± 0.356

HD 4313 1.658 ± 0.109 5.068 ± 0.533 3.220 ± 0.069 2.188 ± 0.430

HD 4395 1.358 ± 0.047 2.681 ± 0.191 3.681 ± 0.050 3.298 ± 0.408

HD 4917 1.268 ± 0.108 4.902 ± 0.549 3.133 ± 0.089 5.010 ± 1.471

HD 5891 1.143 ± 0.202 9.773 ± 1.933 2.488 ± 0.167 5.694 ± 3.296

HD 6019 1.219 ± 0.086 4.781 ± 0.480 3.138 ± 0.064 3.959 ± 0.919

HD 6030 1.394 ± 0.078 3.796 ± 0.399 3.396 ± 0.072 3.451 ± 0.574

HD 7530 1.194 ± 0.115 3.985 ± 0.651 3.287 ± 0.104 4.647 ± 1.514

HD 7931 1.298 ± 0.083 4.754 ± 0.425 3.170 ± 0.065 4.556 ± 0.987

HD 7980 1.340 ± 0.110 6.214 ± 0.596 2.951 ± 0.075 4.151 ± 1.110

HD 8375 1.604 ± 0.022 3.707 ± 0.096 3.475 ± 0.015 2.276 ± 0.086

HD 8407 1.127 ± 0.065 3.711 ± 0.335 3.324 ± 0.060 6.027 ± 1.248

HD 8508 1.212 ± 0.130 7.405 ± 1.158 2.755 ± 0.137 4.705 ± 1.726

HD 9156 2.128 ± 0.252 8.573 ± 2.001 2.872 ± 0.153 1.025 ± 0.334

HD 9218 1.236 ± 0.093 5.601 ± 0.510 3.006 ± 0.060 4.822 ± 1.242

HD 9313 1.389 ± 0.074 4.152 ± 0.341 3.317 ± 0.060 3.533 ± 0.564

HD 9554 1.032 ± 0.087 6.229 ± 0.720 2.835 ± 0.078 7.884 ± 2.359

HD 9625 2.158 ± 0.239 9.389 ± 1.585 2.799 ± 0.104 1.054 ± 0.337

HD 10011 1.540 ± 0.093 4.026 ± 0.463 3.388 ± 0.075 2.416 ± 0.425

HD 10212 1.247 ± 0.080 4.223 ± 0.431 3.255 ± 0.069 4.605 ± 1.006

HD 10245 1.194 ± 0.115 5.370 ± 0.824 3.028 ± 0.119 6.552 ± 2.217

Table 6 continued on next page 92 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 6 (continued)

Star M R log g Age

(M⊙) (R⊙) (Gyr)

HD 10383 1.539 ± 0.209 5.380 ± 1.168 3.136 ± 0.140 2.881 ± 1.144

HD 10479 1.327 ± 0.242 6.249 ± 2.345 2.942 ± 0.253 3.557 ± 1.992

HD 10823 1.513 ± 0.083 3.839 ± 0.409 3.422 ± 0.069 2.464 ± 0.394

HD 10909 0.945 ± 0.038 5.571 ± 0.442 2.894 ± 0.061 10.074 ± 1.418

HD 11288 1.545 ± 0.206 3.417 ± 0.830 3.532 ± 0.153 2.571 ± 1.017

HD 11970 1.345 ± 0.085 3.321 ± 0.417 3.496 ± 0.083 3.223 ± 0.585

HD 12137 1.690 ± 0.123 5.590 ± 0.711 3.144 ± 0.084 2.003 ± 0.422

HD 12164 1.535 ± 0.101 3.399 ± 0.415 3.533 ± 0.078 2.440 ± 0.450

HD 13167 1.297 ± 0.092 2.046 ± 0.246 3.901 ± 0.080 4.333 ± 2.320

HD 14787 1.533 ± 0.126 4.491 ± 0.696 3.291 ± 0.102 2.550 ± 0.597

HD 15336 1.262 ± 0.158 2.957 ± 0.639 3.570 ± 0.135 4.205 ± 1.722

HD 15391 1.118 ± 0.152 8.416 ± 2.418 2.609 ± 0.245 5.668 ± 2.594

HD 15928 1.371 ± 0.070 2.930 ± 0.281 3.610 ± 0.065 3.042 ± 0.405

HD 16175 1.339 ± 0.026 1.709 ± 0.072 4.073 ± 0.030 3.172 ± 0.807

HD 16178 1.985 ± 0.121 8.565 ± 0.762 2.843 ± 0.063 1.291 ± 0.231

HD 16984 1.177 ± 0.086 4.112 ± 0.455 3.253 ± 0.074 5.570 ± 1.431

HD 17311 1.568 ± 0.089 4.463 ± 0.465 3.307 ± 0.068 2.335 ± 0.390

HD 17620 1.790 ± 0.186 4.917 ± 0.931 3.280 ± 0.119 1.512 ± 0.455

HD 18015 1.449 ± 0.073 3.075 ± 0.317 3.595 ± 0.066 2.816 ± 0.415

HD 18645 1.500 ± 0.072 3.089 ± 0.305 3.608 ± 0.065 2.835 ± 0.475

HD 18667 1.198 ± 0.102 3.586 ± 0.559 3.380 ± 0.105 5.449 ± 1.643

HD 18742 1.474 ± 0.097 4.759 ± 0.552 3.223 ± 0.075 2.729 ± 0.521

HD 19522 1.391 ± 0.104 2.820 ± 0.407 3.652 ± 0.093 3.159 ± 0.832

HD 19659 1.617 ± 0.043 3.492 ± 0.181 3.533 ± 0.034 2.331 ± 0.193

HD 21340 1.813 ± 0.144 7.221 ± 0.992 2.952 ± 0.089 1.570 ± 0.335

HD 21449 1.518 ± 0.209 10.597 ± 0.692 2.544 ± 0.090 2.924 ± 1.239

HD 21581 0.864 ± 0.058 15.119 ± 1.160 1.988 ± 0.052 9.140 ± 2.095

HD 22233 1.856 ± 0.169 4.987 ± 0.839 3.284 ± 0.107 1.478 ± 0.395

HD 22657 1.281 ± 0.094 5.016 ± 0.495 3.117 ± 0.065 4.602 ± 1.160

Table 6 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 93 Table 6 (continued)

Star M R log g Age

(M⊙) (R⊙) (Gyr)

HD 22682 1.553 ± 0.041 4.246 ± 0.189 3.346 ± 0.031 2.446 ± 0.186

HD 22844 1.516 ± 0.062 3.077 ± 0.231 3.616 ± 0.047 3.016 ± 0.364

HD 23134 1.421 ± 0.207 4.785 ± 1.226 3.203 ± 0.164 3.386 ± 1.451

HD 23825 1.403 ± 0.087 2.574 ± 0.237 3.729 ± 0.066 3.232 ± 2.645

HD 24148 1.630 ± 0.248 6.498 ± 1.755 2.997 ± 0.174 2.146 ± 0.903

HD 24316 1.433 ± 0.156 9.543 ± 1.826 2.608 ± 0.161 3.156 ± 1.065

HD 24365 1.343 ± 0.072 3.093 ± 0.317 3.557 ± 0.067 3.236 ± 0.488

HD 25622 1.975 ± 0.177 7.630 ± 1.514 2.941 ± 0.138 1.268 ± 0.310

HD 25975 1.520 ± 0.048 4.135 ± 0.128 3.360 ± 0.035 2.842 ± 0.252

HD 26007 1.156 ± 0.137 6.924 ± 1.725 2.793 ± 0.202 5.607 ± 2.290

HD 26634 1.333 ± 0.103 5.640 ± 0.638 3.033 ± 0.071 3.393 ± 0.818

HD 27297 1.424 ± 0.142 3.033 ± 0.546 3.599 ± 0.114 3.192 ± 0.949

HD 27956 1.244 ± 0.102 5.154 ± 0.596 3.081 ± 0.074 4.573 ± 1.279

HD 28678 2.083 ± 0.223 8.339 ± 1.856 2.887 ± 0.150 1.047 ± 0.306

HD 28737 1.066 ± 0.105 6.877 ± 1.035 2.763 ± 0.105 7.650 ± 2.661

HD 30090 1.559 ± 0.039 3.803 ± 0.169 3.442 ± 0.028 2.134 ± 0.150

HD 30128 2.034 ± 0.255 6.381 ± 1.389 3.109 ± 0.136 1.218 ± 0.449

HD 30166 1.386 ± 0.106 6.546 ± 0.574 2.920 ± 0.064 3.386 ± 0.789

HD 30856 1.366 ± 0.073 4.353 ± 0.372 3.268 ± 0.060 3.461 ± 0.534

HD 30882 1.244 ± 0.116 5.681 ± 0.691 2.997 ± 0.081 4.729 ± 1.490

HD 31018 1.552 ± 0.051 2.636 ± 0.146 3.760 ± 0.037 2.612 ± 0.927

HD 31451 1.407 ± 0.094 4.335 ± 0.520 3.285 ± 0.080 3.200 ± 0.617

HD 31543 1.637 ± 0.171 3.625 ± 0.742 3.505 ± 0.134 2.194 ± 0.822

HD 31693 1.872 ± 0.195 7.071 ± 1.592 2.984 ± 0.155 1.478 ± 0.416

HD 33142 1.609 ± 0.081 4.302 ± 0.388 3.349 ± 0.059 2.359 ± 0.352

HD 33240 1.147 ± 0.114 5.601 ± 0.778 2.974 ± 0.093 6.354 ± 2.225

HD 33298 1.103 ± 0.164 2.014 ± 0.629 3.844 ± 0.215 5.847 ± 3.973

HD 33844 1.531 ± 0.093 5.259 ± 0.365 3.154 ± 0.053 2.912 ± 0.531

HD 34538 1.239 ± 0.046 5.525 ± 0.144 3.019 ± 0.028 4.264 ± 0.528

Table 6 continued on next page 94 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 6 (continued)

Star M R log g Age

(M⊙) (R⊙) (Gyr)

HD 34909 1.514 ± 0.119 4.009 ± 0.646 3.384 ± 0.107 2.700 ± 0.616

HD 37445 1.595 ± 0.262 7.649 ± 2.510 2.845 ± 0.222 2.283 ± 1.055

HD 37601 1.706 ± 0.039 5.234 ± 0.150 3.205 ± 0.024 1.979 ± 0.130

HD 38505 1.625 ± 0.114 4.264 ± 0.551 3.362 ± 0.084 2.350 ± 0.495

HD 39142 1.315 ± 0.175 10.009 ± 1.791 2.530 ± 0.152 4.075 ± 1.743

HD 39731 1.390 ± 0.179 2.880 ± 0.630 3.635 ± 0.135 3.520 ± 1.452

HD 39828 1.529 ± 0.206 4.796 ± 1.242 3.233 ± 0.170 2.723 ± 1.030

HD 40537 1.273 ± 0.043 3.565 ± 0.185 3.411 ± 0.038 4.139 ± 0.468

HD 45210 1.586 ± 0.090 3.598 ± 0.388 3.499 ± 0.069 2.238 ± 0.369

HD 45410 1.581 ± 0.039 4.992 ± 0.154 3.212 ± 0.024 2.303 ± 0.157

HD 45506 1.808 ± 0.036 4.945 ± 0.180 3.280 ± 0.024 1.598 ± 0.088

HD 47562 1.627 ± 0.228 6.454 ± 1.585 3.001 ± 0.158 1.893 ± 0.723

HD 48122 1.295 ± 0.091 4.958 ± 0.532 3.132 ± 0.069 3.240 ± 0.691

HD 50275 1.588 ± 0.161 4.577 ± 0.857 3.290 ± 0.123 2.490 ± 0.735

HD 51272 1.923 ± 0.145 8.249 ± 1.002 2.862 ± 0.083 1.470 ± 0.307

HD 64413 1.178 ± 0.172 8.114 ± 2.638 2.663 ± 0.260 4.879 ± 2.357

HD 64730 1.764 ± 0.160 4.705 ± 0.783 3.312 ± 0.106 1.664 ± 0.441

HD 72003 1.387 ± 0.171 5.163 ± 1.036 3.127 ± 0.129 3.562 ± 1.324

HD 72440 1.391 ± 0.139 2.733 ± 0.522 3.685 ± 0.123 3.202 ± 1.541

HD 72490 1.339 ± 0.086 4.174 ± 0.483 3.296 ± 0.079 3.466 ± 0.672

HD 74390 1.518 ± 0.180 5.024 ± 1.031 3.190 ± 0.132 2.841 ± 0.967

HD 76445 1.016 ± 0.040 3.776 ± 0.239 3.263 ± 0.051 9.554 ± 1.336

HD 77172 1.294 ± 0.094 4.272 ± 0.496 3.261 ± 0.078 4.404 ± 1.083

HD 77818 1.210 ± 0.091 5.330 ± 0.460 3.040 ± 0.061 5.288 ± 1.396

HD 80811 0.947 ± 0.039 3.634 ± 0.308 3.266 ± 0.059 9.948 ± 1.432

HD 82074 1.386 ± 0.019 3.763 ± 0.116 3.402 ± 0.022 2.800 ± 0.088

HD 82886 1.507 ± 0.082 4.735 ± 0.460 3.239 ± 0.062 2.326 ± 0.363

HD 83024 1.272 ± 0.084 4.722 ± 0.362 3.167 ± 0.062 4.956 ± 1.120

HD 83394 1.277 ± 0.056 4.460 ± 0.296 3.218 ± 0.043 3.863 ± 0.557

Table 6 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 95 Table 6 (continued)

Star M R log g Age

(M⊙) (R⊙) (Gyr)

HD 83752 1.664 ± 0.054 2.854 ± 0.188 3.720 ± 0.047 2.043 ± 0.598

HD 85440 1.563 ± 0.076 3.629 ± 0.354 3.485 ± 0.063 2.437 ± 0.348

HD 85472 1.329 ± 0.043 2.516 ± 0.131 3.733 ± 0.031 3.883 ± 0.401

HD 87230 1.700 ± 0.080 4.590 ± 0.371 3.317 ± 0.054 2.023 ± 0.282

HD 87669 1.185 ± 0.110 5.065 ± 0.639 3.075 ± 0.084 5.855 ± 1.923

HD 88134 1.394 ± 0.101 4.394 ± 0.514 3.269 ± 0.082 3.549 ± 0.780

HD 88654 1.526 ± 0.060 3.200 ± 0.233 3.584 ± 0.045 2.818 ± 0.321

HD 89391 1.185 ± 0.072 3.974 ± 0.340 3.286 ± 0.061 5.326 ± 1.158

HD 90043 1.708 ± 0.042 5.267 ± 0.184 3.200 ± 0.026 1.891 ± 0.137

HD 90792 1.600 ± 0.238 6.183 ± 1.431 3.032 ± 0.142 2.293 ± 0.941

HD 93396 1.431 ± 0.074 2.687 ± 0.253 3.705 ± 0.066 3.476 ± 1.735

HD 93461 1.443 ± 0.106 3.251 ± 0.480 3.545 ± 0.097 3.037 ± 0.617

HD 93864 1.266 ± 0.055 3.602 ± 0.268 3.400 ± 0.050 4.065 ± 0.582

HD 94834 1.282 ± 0.068 3.997 ± 0.250 3.315 ± 0.053 4.743 ± 0.869

HD 95089 1.552 ± 0.111 4.591 ± 0.557 3.278 ± 0.080 2.620 ± 0.542

HD 95526 1.228 ± 0.095 4.283 ± 0.537 3.236 ± 0.084 4.907 ± 1.314

HD 96063 1.489 ± 0.107 4.009 ± 0.575 3.377 ± 0.094 2.544 ± 0.524

HD 96683 1.816 ± 0.139 4.547 ± 0.639 3.354 ± 0.089 1.714 ± 0.393

HD 97601 1.632 ± 0.078 4.375 ± 0.369 3.341 ± 0.055 2.080 ± 0.290

HD 98219 1.558 ± 0.083 4.549 ± 0.416 3.287 ± 0.061 2.559 ± 0.394

HD 99706 1.594 ± 0.097 5.293 ± 0.480 3.166 ± 0.060 2.413 ± 0.434

HD 100337 1.556 ± 0.151 5.290 ± 0.898 3.156 ± 0.108 2.335 ± 0.644

HD 102329 1.412 ± 0.163 5.996 ± 0.930 3.005 ± 0.099 3.639 ± 1.268

HD 102444 1.431 ± 0.086 2.924 ± 0.345 3.634 ± 0.075 3.076 ± 0.491

HD 102956 1.670 ± 0.097 4.213 ± 0.442 3.384 ± 0.068 2.201 ± 0.386

HD 103616 1.583 ± 0.069 3.855 ± 0.306 3.438 ± 0.051 2.309 ± 0.290

HD 104017 1.257 ± 0.091 4.441 ± 0.423 3.215 ± 0.075 5.324 ± 1.332

HD 106270 1.351 ± 0.074 2.475 ± 0.194 3.759 ± 0.050 3.475 ± 2.491

HD 106279 1.189 ± 0.137 5.915 ± 1.115 2.942 ± 0.128 4.802 ± 1.868

Table 6 continued on next page 96 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 6 (continued)

Star M R log g Age

(M⊙) (R⊙) (Gyr)

HD 107990 1.896 ± 0.225 10.097 ± 1.367 2.680 ± 0.087 1.508 ± 0.465

HD 108189 1.847 ± 0.100 4.724 ± 0.488 3.326 ± 0.067 1.457 ± 0.230

HD 108863 1.545 ± 0.134 5.417 ± 0.732 3.132 ± 0.085 2.679 ± 0.673

HD 109159 1.421 ± 0.050 3.189 ± 0.242 3.556 ± 0.050 2.997 ± 0.271

HD 109218 1.279 ± 0.056 2.474 ± 0.142 3.731 ± 0.030 4.072 ± 0.593

HD 109929 1.411 ± 0.026 1.789 ± 0.085 4.055 ± 0.034 2.457 ± 0.597

HD 112115 1.586 ± 0.304 10.807 ± 1.283 2.545 ± 0.107 2.698 ± 1.513

HD 112973 1.145 ± 0.076 4.783 ± 0.420 3.110 ± 0.055 5.507 ± 1.287

HD 112988 1.079 ± 0.073 4.946 ± 0.470 3.055 ± 0.056 6.792 ± 1.638

HD 114161 1.948 ± 0.166 8.342 ± 1.120 2.858 ± 0.089 1.457 ± 0.349

HD 114659 1.821 ± 0.289 7.738 ± 1.981 2.894 ± 0.162 1.749 ± 0.768

HD 116029 1.445 ± 0.094 4.655 ± 0.395 3.234 ± 0.062 3.345 ± 0.633

HD 117623 2.160 ± 0.198 10.068 ± 1.059 2.739 ± 0.066 1.079 ± 0.301

HD 117762 1.542 ± 0.088 4.522 ± 0.467 3.288 ± 0.066 2.099 ± 0.342

HD 118082 1.443 ± 0.109 5.145 ± 0.570 3.147 ± 0.073 3.277 ± 0.732

HD 118744 1.448 ± 0.163 6.785 ± 1.275 2.908 ± 0.128 3.058 ± 1.011

HD 120531 1.257 ± 0.071 4.469 ± 0.353 3.209 ± 0.056 4.219 ± 0.800

HD 122253 1.494 ± 0.038 3.582 ± 0.227 3.476 ± 0.044 2.806 ± 0.188

HD 123239 1.319 ± 0.141 6.071 ± 1.110 2.964 ± 0.120 3.865 ± 1.315

HD 124641 1.143 ± 0.110 6.592 ± 0.822 2.830 ± 0.083 6.433 ± 2.182

HD 125217 1.702 ± 0.231 5.848 ± 1.546 3.107 ± 0.176 2.116 ± 0.817

HD 125390 1.410 ± 0.174 5.832 ± 1.241 3.028 ± 0.139 3.224 ± 1.178

HD 125607 1.535 ± 0.094 4.044 ± 0.482 3.383 ± 0.080 2.639 ± 0.468

HD 126991 1.038 ± 0.049 3.265 ± 0.238 3.399 ± 0.047 6.402 ± 1.062

HD 127374 1.175 ± 0.105 4.722 ± 0.596 3.132 ± 0.084 5.389 ± 1.684

HD 128095 1.347 ± 0.066 3.639 ± 0.344 3.418 ± 0.068 3.653 ± 0.543

HD 128720 1.483 ± 0.150 3.308 ± 0.647 3.543 ± 0.127 3.096 ± 0.918

HD 131496 1.317 ± 0.077 4.367 ± 0.372 3.250 ± 0.065 4.428 ± 0.842

HD 136418 1.307 ± 0.048 3.627 ± 0.208 3.408 ± 0.044 3.983 ± 0.490

Table 6 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 97 Table 6 (continued)

Star M R log g Age

(M⊙) (R⊙) (Gyr)

HD 136513 1.172 ± 0.111 5.161 ± 0.670 3.054 ± 0.081 5.378 ± 1.772

HD 140025 1.426 ± 0.076 2.666 ± 0.189 3.712 ± 0.051 3.273 ± 2.521

HD 141712 1.812 ± 0.116 4.487 ± 0.532 3.364 ± 0.075 1.679 ± 0.317

HD 142091 1.487 ± 0.052 4.860 ± 0.117 3.208 ± 0.031 3.104 ± 0.302

HD 142245 1.546 ± 0.092 5.151 ± 0.373 3.176 ± 0.055 2.855 ± 0.514

HD 144363 1.370 ± 0.106 4.221 ± 0.599 3.296 ± 0.095 3.450 ± 0.794

HD 145428 1.247 ± 0.110 6.636 ± 0.691 2.863 ± 0.073 4.324 ± 1.276

HD 146278 1.308 ± 0.098 6.332 ± 0.568 2.924 ± 0.061 4.131 ± 1.017

HD 150331 2.052 ± 0.043 6.110 ± 0.238 3.150 ± 0.028 1.007 ± 0.055

HD 152581 1.481 ± 0.159 4.137 ± 0.858 3.347 ± 0.134 2.423 ± 0.739

HD 152733 1.383 ± 0.072 5.051 ± 0.366 3.144 ± 0.052 3.660 ± 0.586

HD 155413 1.548 ± 0.050 2.616 ± 0.119 3.766 ± 0.035 2.709 ± 1.281

HD 158038 1.533 ± 0.114 4.890 ± 0.404 3.217 ± 0.068 2.918 ± 0.655

HD 158449 1.946 ± 0.122 7.965 ± 0.962 2.897 ± 0.082 1.237 ± 0.215

HD 160215 1.269 ± 0.060 3.681 ± 0.248 3.382 ± 0.051 4.751 ± 0.797

HD 163528 1.713 ± 0.115 5.262 ± 0.601 3.202 ± 0.075 1.906 ± 0.381

HD 166494 1.549 ± 0.076 3.076 ± 0.167 3.623 ± 0.042 2.586 ± 2.076

HD 167042 1.533 ± 0.031 4.310 ± 0.100 3.328 ± 0.022 2.727 ± 0.157

HD 171264 1.636 ± 0.080 3.790 ± 0.350 3.467 ± 0.059 2.151 ± 0.312

HD 175541 1.616 ± 0.103 4.330 ± 0.513 3.346 ± 0.076 2.141 ± 0.401

HD 178251 0.923 ± 0.047 8.313 ± 0.594 2.536 ± 0.049 9.774 ± 1.714

HD 180053 1.719 ± 0.067 4.171 ± 0.299 3.405 ± 0.046 1.997 ± 0.228

HD 180902 1.576 ± 0.079 4.320 ± 0.406 3.337 ± 0.063 2.470 ± 0.372

HD 181342 1.753 ± 0.084 5.153 ± 0.370 3.230 ± 0.051 1.932 ± 0.277

HD 183473 1.391 ± 0.037 2.789 ± 0.160 3.663 ± 0.041 3.134 ± 0.357

HD 185269 1.359 ± 0.047 1.988 ± 0.066 3.947 ± 0.027 3.451 ± 0.902

HD 185351 1.781 ± 0.020 4.867 ± 0.108 3.285 ± 0.014 1.746 ± 0.045

HD 187460 1.050 ± 0.094 7.788 ± 1.134 2.649 ± 0.114 8.088 ± 2.542

HD 188386 1.482 ± 0.128 4.331 ± 0.741 3.308 ± 0.113 2.896 ± 0.720

Table 6 continued on next page 98 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 6 (continued)

Star M R log g Age

(M⊙) (R⊙) (Gyr)

HD 192153 1.334 ± 0.078 3.036 ± 0.327 3.570 ± 0.069 3.328 ± 0.559

HD 192699 1.532 ± 0.034 4.143 ± 0.166 3.361 ± 0.027 2.347 ± 0.152

HD 193342 2.044 ± 0.095 8.602 ± 0.412 2.852 ± 0.032 1.249 ± 0.193

HD 193391 1.480 ± 0.124 3.634 ± 0.626 3.460 ± 0.115 3.041 ± 0.728

HD 194541 1.467 ± 0.094 5.884 ± 0.417 3.037 ± 0.052 3.170 ± 0.593

HD 195787 1.690 ± 0.107 5.650 ± 0.644 3.134 ± 0.073 1.849 ± 0.335

HD 195824 1.443 ± 0.099 3.425 ± 0.493 3.500 ± 0.095 2.964 ± 0.565

HD 196645 1.377 ± 0.052 3.155 ± 0.256 3.550 ± 0.055 3.340 ± 0.322

HD 197162 1.257 ± 0.091 6.004 ± 0.528 2.953 ± 0.057 3.931 ± 0.948

HD 198599 2.428 ± 0.427 12.023 ± 3.260 2.636 ± 0.166 0.762 ± 0.386

HD 200081 1.952 ± 0.149 9.393 ± 1.020 2.755 ± 0.079 1.398 ± 0.283

HD 200491 1.954 ± 0.123 5.570 ± 0.637 3.210 ± 0.072 1.291 ± 0.236

HD 200964 1.542 ± 0.041 4.679 ± 0.190 3.259 ± 0.028 2.336 ± 0.181

HD 202696 1.281 ± 0.093 4.146 ± 0.490 3.283 ± 0.085 4.720 ± 1.173

HD 202867 1.481 ± 0.101 3.528 ± 0.488 3.486 ± 0.091 2.732 ± 0.527

HD 203471 1.513 ± 0.128 3.197 ± 0.532 3.581 ± 0.108 2.647 ± 0.679

HD 205163 1.928 ± 0.259 5.740 ± 1.454 3.178 ± 0.165 1.403 ± 0.550

HD 206610 1.766 ± 0.300 7.221 ± 2.031 2.941 ± 0.175 1.925 ± 0.914

HD 206635 1.234 ± 0.064 3.478 ± 0.298 3.419 ± 0.057 4.404 ± 0.777

HD 207077 1.252 ± 0.076 3.607 ± 0.365 3.394 ± 0.063 3.699 ± 0.731

HD 208585 1.541 ± 0.132 4.545 ± 0.693 3.283 ± 0.102 2.530 ± 0.620

HD 210011 2.885 ± 0.127 11.634 ± 1.092 2.741 ± 0.061 0.438 ± 0.053

HD 210521 1.759 ± 0.110 4.997 ± 0.563 3.259 ± 0.071 1.681 ± 0.308

HD 210702 1.659 ± 0.038 4.861 ± 0.143 3.257 ± 0.025 2.154 ± 0.145

HD 212771 1.752 ± 0.104 5.036 ± 0.527 3.250 ± 0.066 1.676 ± 0.287

HD 213278 1.416 ± 0.117 3.536 ± 0.576 3.466 ± 0.106 2.776 ± 0.650

HD 215049 1.415 ± 0.086 2.903 ± 0.338 3.637 ± 0.076 3.313 ± 0.542

HD 215549 1.075 ± 0.051 4.401 ± 0.180 3.155 ± 0.038 7.045 ± 1.220

HD 215908 1.639 ± 0.119 5.249 ± 0.703 3.185 ± 0.086 1.815 ± 0.378

Table 6 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 99 Table 6 (continued)

Star M R log g Age

(M⊙) (R⊙) (Gyr)

HD 216834 1.445 ± 0.163 4.369 ± 0.984 3.290 ± 0.148 2.568 ± 0.803

HD 217496 1.467 ± 0.094 3.679 ± 0.511 3.445 ± 0.093 2.842 ± 0.505

HD 217591 1.533 ± 0.079 4.101 ± 0.387 3.370 ± 0.062 2.435 ± 0.365

HD 217681 1.599 ± 0.097 4.149 ± 0.462 3.379 ± 0.073 2.517 ± 0.461

HD 219553 1.412 ± 0.091 4.528 ± 0.390 3.249 ± 0.063 3.691 ± 0.709

HD 220122 1.241 ± 0.194 8.801 ± 2.718 2.616 ± 0.242 4.468 ± 2.250

HD 220952 1.599 ± 0.066 4.713 ± 0.317 3.268 ± 0.046 2.370 ± 0.293

HD 221504 1.371 ± 0.072 2.451 ± 0.174 3.769 ± 0.052 3.790 ± 2.561

HD 222112 1.362 ± 0.198 4.584 ± 1.125 3.222 ± 0.161 4.186 ± 1.843

HD 223627 1.249 ± 0.123 5.465 ± 0.729 3.032 ± 0.086 5.000 ± 1.685

HD 224032 1.461 ± 0.074 2.210 ± 0.238 3.886 ± 0.073 2.980 ± 0.844

HD 224679 1.669 ± 0.158 3.712 ± 0.705 3.494 ± 0.124 2.070 ± 0.898

HD 225021 1.910 ± 0.125 5.565 ± 0.626 3.201 ± 0.071 1.484 ± 0.288

HD 236427 1.495 ± 0.060 3.279 ± 0.266 3.555 ± 0.054 2.844 ± 0.313

HIP 43212 2.158 ± 0.238 9.148 ± 1.740 2.822 ± 0.122 1.087 ± 0.345

HIP 87123 1.029 ± 0.061 4.784 ± 0.421 3.063 ± 0.073 8.921 ± 1.870 100 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

Table 7. Galactic UVW space velocities.

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 1100 36.132 -6.115 -29.551

HD 1293 -25.861 17.024 -39.147

HD 1384 28.312 -29.649 -20.650

HD 1502 -40.350 -41.970 -8.545

HD 2946 -24.045 -0.934 -10.325

HD 3458 7.253 -2.470 4.137

HD 4313 -3.335 11.923 -9.298

HD 4395 49.210 11.520 -3.237

HD 4917 -4.942 -17.733 8.737

HD 5891 56.833 -88.163 28.657

HD 6019 18.923 -4.990 18.268

HD 6030 -7.004 -1.722 28.430

HD 7530 -36.505 -17.887 -51.427

HD 7931 -38.315 -24.418 -6.597

Table 7 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 101 Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 7980 67.684 -14.982 -6.755

HD 8375 -58.681 -19.825 33.245

HD 8407 -49.757 -2.384 17.434

HD 8508 -24.558 -45.446 -58.222

HD 9156 -21.986 7.281 -19.994

HD 9218 -19.819 -23.693 -6.565

HD 9313 34.168 -57.701 -42.035

HD 9554 -17.982 -51.131 24.821

HD 9625 41.199 -30.414 7.471

HD 10011 -53.946 -12.498 -34.803

HD 10212 41.319 -10.967 -26.873

HD 10245 ·········

HD 10383 8.799 -18.468 -27.685

HD 10479 -42.243 -1.762 15.234

HD 10823 11.344 -5.773 -34.919

HD 10909 -113.306 -12.656 16.038

HD 11288 -30.806 -42.203 1.147

Table 7 continued on next page 102 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 11970 -40.040 -54.905 17.353

HD 12137 -7.063 -26.119 0.767

HD 12164 28.179 -3.656 -0.104

HD 13167 -7.680 -33.043 -9.375

HD 14787 7.419 7.138 7.625

HD 15336 27.477 -2.773 20.246

HD 15391 -25.139 22.191 -19.992

HD 15928 -1.925 23.475 -13.470

HD 16175 -10.405 14.252 -20.172

HD 16178 32.075 -35.906 -12.923

HD 16984 -71.268 -5.193 -31.094

HD 17311 18.997 13.763 -35.101

HD 17620 4.963 2.558 -4.260

HD 18015 -30.676 -27.173 -0.273

HD 18645 10.517 -7.585 -5.774

HD 18667 -16.329 -20.887 8.402

HD 18742 23.743 1.012 3.575

Table 7 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 103 Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 19522 -94.429 -43.612 2.288

HD 19659 46.477 -24.004 -5.099

HD 21340 -30.978 -37.347 6.116

HD 21449 -6.369 -16.817 14.543

HD 21581 -103.792 -129.639 -102.860

HD 22233 -11.734 -7.616 -13.809

HD 22657 -63.697 -17.308 -28.814

HD 22682 29.448 -31.098 -4.555

HD 22844 5.968 -38.834 8.540

HD 23134 8.793 -7.227 -26.963

HD 23825 39.050 -38.928 -32.247

HD 24148 -46.702 -41.401 -11.445

HD 24316 30.720 -17.901 -87.763

HD 24365 -36.351 -29.534 19.458

HD 25622 -14.653 10.905 7.658

HD 25975 44.323 -29.419 -35.459

HD 26007 -29.023 -8.051 13.866

Table 7 continued on next page 104 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 26634 -15.370 -42.342 24.692

HD 27297 -39.334 -47.890 -4.496

HD 27956 0.941 -38.768 -48.431

HD 28678 -50.468 -20.110 -30.581

HD 28737 11.598 -21.361 2.743

HD 30090 -17.219 24.259 12.829

HD 30128 -20.357 -28.463 10.246

HD 30166 12.192 -34.685 -31.537

HD 30856 -14.198 -32.257 -15.472

HD 30882 19.827 -58.967 7.919

HD 31018 3.881 -10.904 -0.687

HD 31451 -1.877 -6.103 -9.751

HD 31543 27.932 -29.259 -8.210

HD 31693 -18.052 -28.139 -10.046

HD 33142 -37.832 -0.233 -12.592

HD 33240 0.494 -11.219 -6.246

HD 33298 7.018 -0.320 18.116

Table 7 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 105 Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 33844 -37.794 -18.898 0.710

HD 34538 -47.198 -44.885 -39.515

HD 34909 11.299 -10.080 -11.565

HD 37445 -31.556 -7.609 -30.093

HD 37601 31.829 -8.756 0.001

HD 38505 -62.419 -60.707 -0.933

HD 39142 -8.966 1.299 -6.958

HD 39731 -27.889 -13.132 -13.757

HD 39828 -26.216 -18.607 10.823

HD 40537 -43.685 -47.814 18.848

HD 45210 -56.739 -0.759 -27.061

HD 45410 -77.919 -55.967 -21.088

HD 45506 -40.632 -11.743 -32.316

HD 47562 4.303 -22.640 -11.038

HD 48122 3.067 -9.084 37.864

HD 50275 -80.920 -36.272 -8.617

HD 51272 -25.341 -7.551 -35.054

Table 7 continued on next page 106 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 64413 2.936 -28.289 1.814

HD 64730 -7.065 -38.805 -20.078

HD 72003 -14.359 -39.196 -14.351

HD 72440 21.392 -11.803 -24.371

HD 72490 -11.191 -25.136 24.063

HD 74390 51.105 -53.156 -27.664

HD 76445 22.843 -1.735 -1.693

HD 77172 -33.269 -86.388 -36.903

HD 77818 25.800 -64.533 -10.565

HD 80811 -28.348 -111.984 -65.966

HD 82074 7.015 -0.852 -19.274

HD 82886 0.661 -21.379 14.167

HD 83024 -40.939 -1.415 -27.216

HD 83394 -35.500 -57.009 39.847

HD 83752 -24.924 -34.259 -5.332

HD 85440 4.899 -6.597 -3.636

HD 85472 13.267 -32.020 10.199

Table 7 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 107 Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 87230 -27.388 -49.038 -11.217

HD 87669 74.016 -37.545 26.092

HD 88134 15.080 -34.911 18.824

HD 88654 17.263 -1.753 -5.890

HD 89391 25.672 -31.163 7.990

HD 90043 24.068 -9.059 12.016

HD 90792 -25.103 -35.838 0.193

HD 93396 -17.729 -59.457 -15.490

HD 93461 6.137 -15.714 5.942

HD 93864 -60.503 -46.238 -35.769

HD 94834 -34.276 4.788 -9.516

HD 95089 -6.597 -35.397 -16.796

HD 95526 -66.936 -92.772 0.067

HD 96063 24.505 -2.138 0.758

HD 96683 -19.548 -23.622 -0.931

HD 97601 46.690 -24.120 -40.540

HD 98219 -68.247 -25.184 -43.401

Table 7 continued on next page 108 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 99706 51.958 -42.142 -5.681

HD 100337 35.745 8.217 -19.876

HD 102329 -23.425 -31.759 -1.154

HD 102444 -1.127 -33.049 4.710

HD 102956 7.511 -20.594 -18.546

HD 103616 15.260 -46.341 -46.765

HD 104017 -6.620 10.651 -7.253

HD 106270 -22.601 -44.307 3.348

HD 106279 16.700 -13.983 -44.073

HD 107990 49.430 -1.110 -13.614

HD 108189 -61.768 -13.415 -0.122

HD 108863 -29.936 -40.065 -33.777

HD 109159 -45.234 -28.989 7.492

HD 109218 -23.394 -48.090 2.968

HD 109929 -11.553 -7.539 -11.757

HD 112115 -36.403 -50.748 3.559

HD 112973 -34.668 -28.006 -33.301

Table 7 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 109 Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 112988 -38.711 -30.084 -31.050

HD 114161 -27.205 -18.061 -6.596

HD 114659 -0.225 -8.917 -2.801

HD 116029 10.941 -29.540 -7.410

HD 117623 -27.148 -31.497 4.213

HD 117762 -60.346 31.319 0.387

HD 118082 -5.970 10.819 -25.005

HD 118744 4.122 4.434 -0.840

HD 120531 -11.301 4.159 26.186

HD 122253 -7.799 7.747 -13.239

HD 123239 22.955 5.263 42.413

HD 124641 -6.259 2.639 12.256

HD 125217 -10.315 -16.450 -9.380

HD 125390 -6.616 -44.780 -64.903

HD 125607 -10.673 -47.075 -23.312

HD 126991 -142.931 -48.216 -42.798

HD 127374 -34.761 -11.794 -22.964

Table 7 continued on next page 110 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 128095 69.335 -17.441 14.847

HD 128720 41.564 -24.804 -1.394

HD 131496 26.444 2.285 -13.003

HD 136418 58.460 -69.784 -12.521

HD 136513 -51.594 -41.024 -28.461

HD 140025 35.171 2.120 27.845

HD 141712 9.959 -32.101 -4.682

HD 142091 33.256 -41.301 -18.913

HD 142245 -0.537 -24.229 20.182

HD 144363 0.502 12.525 10.053

HD 145428 -25.843 -78.742 30.229

HD 146278 65.944 -41.205 23.422

HD 150331 -13.531 -31.617 1.857

HD 152581 13.759 -1.634 -10.815

HD 152733 -53.506 -7.941 -11.521

HD 155413 -19.294 -19.086 -8.971

HD 158038 36.720 11.917 -17.330

Table 7 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 111 Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 158449 -32.891 -8.012 9.839

HD 160215 -45.805 -55.667 -3.056

HD 163528 -38.861 -51.348 -28.469

HD 166494 -37.829 -19.943 -21.244

HD 167042 -62.765 -0.477 -22.798

HD 171264 8.451 9.500 -9.543

HD 175541 46.017 -27.470 -20.507

HD 178251 78.696 -28.841 -75.709

HD 180053 -15.512 -2.246 11.428

HD 180902 -9.011 -5.482 -17.902

HD 181342 9.706 -22.399 15.508

HD 183473 -97.380 -21.625 -7.492

HD 185269 18.771 -8.569 -2.685

HD 185351 24.171 -12.668 5.840

HD 187460 -0.391 -6.592 1.920

HD 188386 -56.915 -47.510 7.097

HD 192153 -58.978 -9.789 -31.280

Table 7 continued on next page 112 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 192699 23.755 -4.032 -1.364

HD 193342 55.369 -22.408 -3.768

HD 193391 -22.036 -37.155 -0.372

HD 194541 -12.821 -18.204 -14.594

HD 195787 62.177 -1.591 -24.179

HD 195824 -6.469 8.034 -17.341

HD 196645 -73.584 1.447 -10.590

HD 197162 -66.192 -131.037 -44.752

HD 198599 14.843 7.213 -13.257

HD 200081 10.011 -5.448 -10.340

HD 200491 -1.840 -8.615 -5.591

HD 200964 -68.683 -38.616 17.727

HD 202696 -44.044 -24.367 2.889

HD 202867 21.720 0.758 -3.602

HD 203471 59.348 5.907 -19.264

HD 205163 44.397 7.075 -36.152

HD 206610 -11.930 -8.810 11.725

Table 7 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 113 Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 206635 -72.813 -46.314 -37.961

HD 207077 -8.214 -34.249 -3.620

HD 208585 2.622 -22.315 18.248

HD 210011 -14.269 -13.330 -12.411

HD 210521 -1.377 -6.184 13.924

HD 210702 6.575 11.064 -11.138

HD 212771 75.184 -40.424 2.084

HD 213278 -83.193 -17.956 21.833

HD 215049 -35.264 -46.300 6.331

HD 215549 113.456 -15.861 -43.452

HD 215908 -3.873 6.047 2.187

HD 216834 -0.586 -27.799 22.188

HD 217496 32.899 -37.785 -8.210

HD 217591 -4.675 -24.406 -5.188

HD 217681 32.854 3.168 11.559

HD 219553 1.851 -20.682 -8.998

HD 220122 9.560 -16.327 46.510

Table 7 continued on next page 114 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 7 (continued)

Star U V W

(km s−1) (km s−1) (km s−1)

HD 220952 -47.219 -22.520 6.424

HD 221504 -7.862 -8.035 -2.331

HD 222112 -10.654 -53.172 -13.864

HD 223627 12.722 -59.469 -16.077

HD 224032 -39.182 -46.468 -28.563

HD 224679 -57.886 -60.007 -9.621

HD 225021 -21.590 -18.731 -7.444

HD 236427 10.573 -10.854 -35.878

HIP 43212 -7.211 -4.763 -8.300

HIP 87123 -43.135 -54.089 -10.479 Retired A Stars Revisited 115

Table 8. K magnitudes and Photometric

Eﬀective Temperatures.

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD1100 5.319 4801 ± 32

HD1293 6.354 5247 ± 46

HD1384 5.785 4947 ± 37

HD1502 6.120 5027 ± 44

HD2946 6.275 5508 ± 45

HD3458 6.180 5156 ± 31

HD4313 5.595 5015 ± 40

HD4395 5.972 5620 ± 43

HD4917 5.610 4801 ± 31

HD5891 5.621 4994 ± 31

HD6019 5.579 5100 ± 43

HD6030 5.553 4930 ± 40

HD7530 6.087 5018 ± 38

HD7931 5.512 4844 ± 37

Table 8 continued on next page 116 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD7980 5.202 4837 ± 29

HD8375 4.290 5231 ± 42

HD8407 5.479 4962 ± 39

HD8508 5.352 4784 ± 31

HD9156 5.938 4775 ± 32

HD9218 5.562 4847 ± 29

HD9313 5.483 4908 ± 37

HD9554 5.914 4808 ± 38

HD9625 6.092 4934 ± 34

HD 10011 5.880 5136 ± 41

HD 10212 5.818 4954 ± 39

HD 10245 5.836 4868 ± 39

HD 10383 5.931 4896 ± 39

HD 10479 6.441 4911 ± 34

HD 10823 6.023 5174 ± 51

HD 10909 5.544 4706 ± 41

HD 11288 6.387 5176 ± 45

Table 8 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 117 Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 11970 6.139 5188 ± 39

HD 12137 5.398 5007 ± 41

HD 12164 6.212 5527 ± 49

HD 13167 6.711 5734 ± 47

HD 14787 5.388 4985 ± 40

HD 15336 6.848 5177 ± 49

HD 15391 6.334 4946 ± 35

HD 15928 5.950 5434 ± 46

HD 16175 5.853 5915 ± 47

HD 16178 5.762 4850 ± 31

HD 16984 5.804 4807 ± 42

HD 17311 6.056 5168 ± 40

HD 17620 6.118 5174 ± 41

HD 18015 6.204 5689 ± 46

HD 18645 5.999 5413 ± 46

HD 18667 6.019 4954 ± 42

HD 18742 5.554 4982 ± 42

Table 8 continued on next page 118 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 19522 6.414 5694 ± 47

HD 19659 5.459 5754 ± 43

HD 21340 5.137 5043 ± 40

HD 21449 4.814 4857 ± 33

HD 21581 6.414 5101 ± 35

HD 22233 5.687 5084 ± 39

HD 22657 5.417 4886 ± 39

HD 22682 4.531 5030 ± 37

HD 22844 6.129 5472 ± 42

HD 23134 6.022 5006 ± 40

HD 23825 6.185 5504 ± 47

HD 24148 5.809 5013 ± 39

HD 24316 5.294 4911 ± 36

HD 24365 5.821 5278 ± 40

HD 25622 5.407 5085 ± 44

HD 25975 ······

HD 26007 5.892 4796 ± 33

Table 8 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 119 Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 26634 5.701 5079 ± 41

HD 27297 6.110 5087 ± 42

HD 27956 5.732 5025 ± 42

HD 28678 5.775 4837 ± 42

HD 28737 5.677 4716 ± 36

HD 30090 4.707 5518 ± 42

HD 30128 5.998 5105 ± 41

HD 30166 5.152 4924 ± 30

HD 30856 5.657 5105 ± 43

HD 30882 5.832 5073 ± 36

HD 31018 6.084 6493 ± 55

HD 31451 5.811 5133 ± 40

HD 31543 6.381 5593 ± 53

HD 31693 5.429 5037 ± 39

HD 33142 5.792 5098 ± 39

HD 33240 5.797 4922 ± 34

HD 33298 6.385 5554 ± 46

Table 8 continued on next page 120 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 33844 4.945 4905 ± 37

HD 34538 ······

HD 34909 5.775 5045 ± 42

HD 37445 5.913 4907 ± 30

HD 37601 ······

HD 38505 5.401 5002 ± 38

HD 39142 5.510 4879 ± 34

HD 39731 6.088 5093 ± 40

HD 39828 5.380 4929 ± 44

HD 40537 5.094 5010 ± 41

HD 45210 5.964 5608 ± 43

HD 45410 ······

HD 45506 ······

HD 47562 6.030 5005 ± 46

HD 48122 5.890 5232 ± 44

HD 50275 5.978 4980 ± 40

HD 51272 5.482 4906 ± 36

Table 8 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 121 Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 64413 5.917 4879 ± 33

HD 64730 5.970 5168 ± 40

HD 72003 5.313 4868 ± 37

HD 72440 6.585 5587 ± 42

HD 72490 5.614 4940 ± 39

HD 74390 5.892 4916 ± 37

HD 76445 5.284 4808 ± 40

HD 77172 5.726 4866 ± 38

HD 77818 5.202 4747 ± 36

HD 80811 6.159 4967 ± 39

HD 82074 ······

HD 82886 5.452 5094 ± 39

HD 83024 5.490 4767 ± 35

HD 83394 5.217 4932 ± 39

HD 83752 6.154 5960 ± 57

HD 85440 5.763 5169 ± 43

HD 85472 5.547 5267 ± 71

Table 8 continued on next page 122 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 87230 5.568 5062 ± 39

HD 87669 5.704 4700 ± 31

HD 88134 5.927 4876 ± 40

HD 88654 5.698 5284 ± 44

HD 89391 5.608 4960 ± 40

HD 90043 ······

HD 90792 5.698 4812 ± 33

HD 93396 6.122 5359 ± 41

HD 93461 6.108 5016 ± 39

HD 93864 5.791 5051 ± 40

HD 94834 5.200 4802 ± 37

HD 95089 5.626 4859 ± 38

HD 95526 6.008 4915 ± 41

HD 96063 6.050 4967 ± 47

HD 96683 5.865 4949 ± 38

HD 97601 5.363 5074 ± 38

HD 98219 5.813 5057 ± 41

Table 8 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 123 Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 99706 5.335 4927 ± 37

HD 100337 5.656 4953 ± 46

HD 102329 5.402 4731 ± 30

HD 102444 5.999 5230 ± 46

HD 102956 5.663 4968 ± 38

HD 103616 5.593 5266 ± 42

HD 104017 5.375 4782 ± 36

HD 106270 5.862 5508 ± 46

HD 106279 6.095 4927 ± 33

HD 107990 5.591 4872 ± 31

HD 108189 5.814 5364 ± 45

HD 108863 5.392 4866 ± 40

HD 109159 5.963 5329 ± 43

HD 109218 6.155 5257 ± 44

HD 109929 6.320 6014 ± 48

HD 112115 5.566 4681 ± 30

HD 112973 5.350 4907 ± 39

Table 8 continued on next page 124 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 112988 5.436 4856 ± 40

HD 114161 5.631 4882 ± 34

HD 114659 5.922 4866 ± 41

HD 116029 5.534 4894 ± 36

HD 117623 5.037 5138 ± 31

HD 117762 5.805 5121 ± 41

HD 118082 5.677 4954 ± 43

HD 118744 5.430 4764 ± 31

HD 120531 5.701 4983 ± 37

HD 122253 5.626 5064 ± 39

HD 123239 5.856 4894 ± 31

HD 124641 5.490 4703 ± 28

HD 125217 5.886 5006 ± 39

HD 125390 5.875 4913 ± 38

HD 125607 5.899 5048 ± 38

HD 126991 5.838 5159 ± 45

HD 127374 5.808 4827 ± 36

Table 8 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 125 Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 128095 5.869 4979 ± 37

HD 128720 6.107 5027 ± 41

HD 131496 5.437 4864 ± 37

HD 136418 ······

HD 136513 5.848 4803 ± 30

HD 140025 6.453 5557 ± 45

HD 141712 6.312 5219 ± 40

HD 142091 ······

HD 142245 5.110 4867 ± 44

HD 144363 5.842 5006 ± 39

HD 145428 5.203 5111 ± 43

HD 146278 5.540 4824 ± 29

HD 150331 ······

HD 152581 6.173 5042 ± 38

HD 152733 5.754 4904 ± 38

HD 155413 5.627 5849 ± 49

HD 158038 5.156 4948 ± 42

Table 8 continued on next page 126 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 158449 5.762 5387 ± 41

HD 160215 5.804 4898 ± 37

HD 163528 6.143 5041 ± 41

HD 166494 5.991 5545 ± 43

HD 167042 ······

HD 171264 6.026 5479 ± 49

HD 175541 5.829 5277 ± 43

HD 178251 5.364 4804 ± 29

HD 180053 5.840 5164 ± 39

HD 180902 5.543 5143 ± 41

HD 181342 5.251 5076 ± 40

HD 183473 ······

HD 185269 5.260 6015 ± 45

HD 185351 ······

HD 187460 5.734 4808 ± 30

HD 188386 5.850 5040 ± 37

HD 192153 6.224 5434 ± 44

Table 8 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 127 Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 192699 4.366 5113 ± 43

HD 193342 5.794 5521 ± 41

HD 193391 5.947 4957 ± 43

HD 194541 5.132 4997 ± 37

HD 195787 5.379 5366 ± 47

HD 195824 5.887 5065 ± 39

HD 196645 5.672 5082 ± 42

HD 197162 5.625 5062 ± 38

HD 198599 5.561 5369 ± 35

HD 200081 5.870 5193 ± 35

HD 200491 5.496 5087 ± 43

HD 200964 ······

HD 202696 5.877 4872 ± 32

HD 202867 5.996 5147 ± 46

HD 203471 6.478 5511 ± 47

HD 205163 6.014 5066 ± 34

HD 206610 5.952 4896 ± 42

Table 8 continued on next page 128 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 206635 6.122 5091 ± 48

HD 207077 6.150 5162 ± 41

HD 208585 5.704 4941 ± 37

HD 210011 4.865 5513 ± 35

HD 210521 5.955 5160 ± 39

HD 210702 ······

HD 212771 5.496 5206 ± 41

HD 213278 6.010 5160 ± 43

HD 215049 6.233 5210 ± 46

HD 215549 ······

HD 215908 5.867 5258 ± 44

HD 216834 5.975 5068 ± 39

HD 217496 5.718 5080 ± 40

HD 217591 5.601 4950 ± 37

HD 217681 5.538 5068 ± 37

HD 219553 4.907 4899 ± 36

HD 220122 6.025 4861 ± 33

Table 8 continued on next page Retired A Stars Revisited 129 Table 8 (continued)

P hot Star KS Teff

(K)

HD 220952 5.587 5022 ± 41

HD 221504 6.198 5381 ± 41

HD 222112 5.937 4801 ± 41

HD 223627 5.737 4859 ± 30

HD 224032 6.657 5733 ± 49

HD 224679 6.669 5640 ± 49

HD 225021 5.436 4994 ± 29

HD 236427 6.129 5326 ± 40

HIP 43212 6.083 5019 ± 39

HIP 87123 5.912 4851 ± 38 130 Ghezzi, Montet & Johnson

Table 9. Results for the Giant Plant Occurrence given by Equation 2.

Retired A Stars ∆[Fe/H] ∆M FGK Dwarfs M Dwarfs α Confidence β Confidence C Confidence

(dex) (M⊙) Interval Interval Interval

J10 0.00 0.00 J10 J10 0.99 (0.79,1.29) 1.19 (0.95,1.25) 0.072 (0.064,0.081)

This work 0.00 0.00 J10 J10 1.10 (0.92,1.40) 1.00 (0.81,1.12) 0.085 (0.073,0.091)

This work 0.00 0.00 J10,B16 M14 1.05 (0.81,1.33) 1.05 (0.88,1.26) 0.085 (0.075,0.093)

This work −0.05 0.00 J10,B16 M14 1.10 (0.87,1.39) 0.95 (0.81,1.17) 0.090 (0.078,0.095)

This work −0.10 0.00 J10,B16 M14 1.25 (0.97,1.49) 0.90 (0.74,1.08) 0.090 (0.079,0.098)

This work 0.00 −0.12 J10,B16 M14 1.05 (0.79,1.33) 1.05 (0.86,1.24) 0.085 (0.077,0.095)

This work −0.05 −0.12 J10,B16 M14 1.15 (0.88,1.42) 0.95 (0.78,1.14) 0.090 (0.080,0.098)

This work −0.10 −0.12 J10,B16 M14 1.15 (0.92,1.46) 0.85 (0.71,1.06) 0.095 (0.082,0.100)

References—J10: Johnson et al. (2010a); M14: Montet et al. (2014); B16: Brewer et al. (2016). Retired A Stars Revisited 131

Table 10. Results for the Giant Plant Occurrence given by Equation 4.

Retired A Stars ∆[Fe/H] ∆M FGK Dwarfs M Dwarfs γ Conﬁdence C Conﬁdence

(dex) (M⊙) Interval Interval

This work 0.00 0.00 J10,B16 M14 1.04 (0.88,1.16) 0.086 (0.076,0.094)

This work −0.05 0.00 J10,B16 M14 1.04 (0.87,1.16) 0.088 (0.079,0.097)

This work −0.10 0.00 J10,B16 M14 1.00 (0.84,1.12) 0.092 (0.082,0.100)

This work 0.00 −0.12 J10,B16 M14 1.04 (0.87,1.15) 0.088 (0.078,0.096)

This work −0.05 −0.12 J10,B16 M14 1.02 (0.84,1.13) 0.090 (0.081,0.099)

This work −0.10 −0.12 J10,B16 M14 0.96 (0.81,1.09) 0.094 (0.084,0.102)

References—J10: Johnson et al. (2010a); M14: Montet et al. (2014); B16: Brewer et al. (2016).